Lessons learned at Daytona 2003

H

HardScrabble

Guest
Just a couple of observations from Speedweeks. Some no doubt discussed already.

1) A plate race is a plate race is a plate race. Nothing new at all from past experiences.

2) The "problem", for lack of a better term, with making passes hinges much more on aero issues than plate issues. The trucks, which seem almost universally acclaimed as the best races this year, are in their own fashion running restrictor plates.

3) A race, like any other sporting event, can be fixed to lose, but not to win. Do not read into this that I for one minute believe NASCAR is fixing the races or even attempting to. But the dominant car(s) of the entire festivities was driven by one Dale Earnhardt Jr. This did not translate into a win in the 500. It is not the first time either. As a reminder for two or three years some 20 years ago a certain blue oval driver was also clearly the class of the field. Much more so than Jr. is now. The #9 Ford didn't win all of those races either. It just can't be guaranteed.

4) There was confirmation that NASCAR's fear (which I share) of the possibility of one of these aero cars doing its dead level best imitation of an aero plane is well founded. Ryan's car, with no assistance from anything but the air and circumstances, flew. And performed its lift off at well below the maximum speed these restricted engine cars are capable of in the draft.

5) The "common templates" are still largely a myth. Many are common, but several critical ones are not. Rumor has it aero rule changes may already be in discussion.

There are others running around on the deserted high banks of my mind, but this is a start.
 
Originally posted by HardScrabble@Feb 18 2003, 05:52 PM
Just a couple of observations from Speedweeks. Some no doubt discussed already.

A race, like any other sporting event, can be fixed to lose, but not to win.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, I disagree whole-heartedly. I would seem very easy to fix a plate "race" in particular. Junior's car in the first Daytona "race" after Dale Sr. passing seemed to have much more throttle response than any other car on the track. I personally suspect a slight modification to Junior's restrictor plate to make it somewhat "less restrictive" than his competitor's plates. That of course is only a theory, but it sure seemed obvious that his car wasn't nearly as slowed as everyone else.
 
Originally posted by 4xchampncountin+Feb 18 2003, 01:19 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (4xchampncountin @ Feb 18 2003, 01:19 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--HardScrabble@Feb 18 2003, 05:52 PM
Just a couple of observations from Speedweeks. Some no doubt discussed already.

A race, like any other sporting event, can be fixed to lose, but not to win.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, I disagree whole-heartedly. I would seem very easy to fix a plate "race" in particular. Junior's car in the first Daytona "race" after Dale Sr. passing seemed to have much more throttle response than any other car on the track. I personally suspect a slight modification to Junior's restrictor plate to make to somewhat "less restrictive" than his competitor's plates. That of course is only a theory, but it sure seemed obvious that his car wasn't nearly as slowed as everyone else. [/b][/quote]
What you say may be true regarding Jr's "edge" in that race. But the point is does that "edge guaranteee a win? Absolutely not. Think about it. If Jr had that same edge in throttle response or whatever on this past Sunday would he have won the race? Not likely. There are far too many factors other than sheer performance which figure into the mix. A driver could easily "throw" a race and lose, as could any team or individual in other sports. An individual can be given an edge but cannot be guaranteed a win, it is simply impossible.
 
I would agree with you on that whole-heartedly. No matter what edge Jr may or may not have been given at Daytona sunday it was negated by the mechanical problems.
 
There is no way to guarantee a certain driver wins any race. But there are (and in my opinion have been) ways to greatly enhance the chances that will happen.
 
You're right that it can't be guaranteed, but it can be helped along.

When they have as much control over the cars as they have, when they have so much control over how the cars perform they can easily "give the nod" to a certain team. When their grubby claws are all over the way the cars perform, it's not a very illogical step to assume they they have their mits somewhere else...especially when so much is to be gained by increasing the odds for such a popular driver with a high profile sponsor they just happen to be courting for series sponsorship.

It's happened in the past, and will most certainly happen again.
 
Is there any point in throwing out that Lil'Es car was the last to be inspected in all 4 races. He had been scheduled next to last for the 500 but lo and behold they found a problem with the tearaways and had to fix that before he could be inspected. Even assuming the inspectors aren't in on the fix (if there is one) are they as diligent with their inspection of the 43rd car as they were the 1st or 21st. Or are they in more of a hurry due to tiredness, time constraints, etc. Are the plates still sealed in an envelope with the driver's name on them? I missed that, this time around.
 
Another good post,HS. And very well reasoned as all of your's are :)

But I dont agree with a couple of your points, as thought provoking as they may be.


1.The comparision to Bill in the early eighties vs.Jr[or rather DEI]in the present is very interesting.But also very different in a couple of key areas.Almost opposite situations in my opinion.

Bill and his era of dominance began about the excact same time as the introduction of the old 'aero-bird' Ford.The very cars that started the modern day path to aero-sensitive stock cars.In Bill's case he was at a turning point in race car designs------away from the shoeboxes[the old 'b-body Chevy,Olds,Buick and Pontiacs]to the radically sleeker and more aero efficient T-Bird's. While a LOT of talk centered[1985]on Bill's 'illegal parts' the fact seemed to be that Brother Earnie just found more of a handle on this new aero-styled car.Waddell Wilson remarked that it was like 'racin' a shoebox against a bullett'.And while Bill was the most visible of the small handful of Ford teams at the time.....all the Ford teams,if not equal to Elliott,certainly were more than equal to that era's GM cars.That is pretty evident by the quickly thrown together 'glassback' Monte carlo of that time[remember those?]

Another point in the comparision is the wide variety and number of wins Bill got in '85.11 wins on the superspeedways.11 poles I think.Clearly a big advantage most places where aero-dynamics played a big role.But again,mainly because of a better grasp of the car design than the competitors.Keep in mind the era:multi-car teams and celebrity drivers were not quite on the horizon yet.So unlike DEI,basically a two-track team,Elliott and co.applied their hard earned knowledge at a variety of places.

But the biggest difference of all between Bill then,DEI now is this:France and Nascar were EXTREMELY uncomfortable with Bill's dominance.France made remarks of Elliott 'stinkin' up the show' and publicily left no doubt that whatever unfair advantage Bill had...Nascar would do away with!Very Ironic considering that within a few short years every car maker in WC would closely mirror the ol' jellybean t-bird! :)

Unlike DEI,Bill was held to the fire....almost legislated out of contention,in fact.Again,an almost opposite case vs.Jr.,who's car was oddly last thru inspection[?]

So my opinion would be that Bill was the fox in the henhouse....DEI is the stAR in nascAR.

2.You are certainly right in the point regarding no guarantee to win.The boxing analogy fits that point:you can pay a guy to lose but you cant pay a guy to win.And as you pointed out ,motorsports has too many X-factors to guarantee anything.But you can certainly INCREASE THE CHANCES of a certain car,at a certain track[particularly when it is onlty 2 tracks] performing better than the competition. Very simply only about three insiders:Head honcho,Inspector,Engineer,would be needed.I am not saying this is the case,of course......but it is very possible in theory.

Otherwise,I agree with your other points and again say it is great to have you back,buddy! :cheers:
 
Originally posted by HardScrabble@Feb 18 2003, 12:52 PM
2) The "problem", for lack of a better term, with making passes hinges much more on aero issues than plate issues. The trucks, which seem almost universally acclaimed as the best races this year, are in their own fashion running restrictor plates.
Click to expand...
Unless the rules changed this year, the Truck series doesn't use restrictor plates. Their carburetor is smaller though, which is essentially the same thing as a restrictor plate.
 
Originally posted by barelypure@Feb 19 2003, 12:05 PM
Is there any point in throwing out that Lil'Es car was the last to be inspected in all 4 races. He had been scheduled next to last for the 500 but lo and behold they found a problem with the tearaways and had to fix that before he could be inspected. Even assuming the inspectors aren't in on the fix (if there is one) are they as diligent with their inspection of the 43rd car as they were the 1st or 21st. Or are they in more of a hurry due to tiredness, time constraints, etc. Are the plates still sealed in an envelope with the driver's name on them? I missed that, this time around.
Click to expand...
I don't know how they determine inspection order, but if anyone knows please share. Same thing for how the plates are handed out. I would think the only fair way would be a draw just like qualifying order.

You missed the point about having to fix the tearaways. Jr was inspected last all weekend and won all weekend. The team was just a little superstitious and found a way to be last through inspection to hopefully win again.
 
Howdy 97 and thanks for the response.

Valid points regarding the Elliott's in the 80's. But I did consider most of your points, and actually chose this comparison because of a couple of them.

While some of the Ford teams were good, none compared to the #9, really not even close at Daytona and Talledega. Ernie, Bill and Dan had all the competitors pulling their hair out trying to figure what these boys had done. If I remember correctly the Elliots maintain to this day that their 1985 cars never made one trip to the wind tunnel, something most of the other high dollar teams of the day had done. Back in that day most teams had only two types of cars, a speedway car and a short track car. Today they have plate cars, speedway cars, intermediate cars, short track cars and road course cars. Given this it is not surprising that the Coors Thunderbird was strong on all the speedways, the short track program was sad.

Your point on the Elliotts being "outsiders" in NASCAR's eyes actually the reason I chose them. Whatever it was the Elliott's had found, be it an aero balance, motor magic or more likely a combination of hte two, NASCAR played absolutely no role in it. The fact is with the same technology and equipment available to every other team in the sport at that time these boys had something and not one dem person could figure out what it was. Not a single one. The dominace at Daytona and Dega continued up to the moment that NASCAR mandated restrictor plates ( a fact which leads me to downplay the aero part of the deal somewhat).

And that is my conclusion, why is it so impossible to accept that DEI might just have something figured that the other folks haven't quite caught up to at this point? If a bunch of hillbillies from the Georgia hills could outsmart the best of their day what has happened that now makes that impossible for a well financed organization that has openly concentrated on the plate race configurations? If the brothers showed up now with the kind of dominance they displayed back then the deafening hue and cry of "FOUL" would include every cheating trick that could be imagined and good dose of NASCAR complicity as well, IMHO.

I do not "know" what the deal is with DEI and the plate tracks, neither does anyone else around here. This is just my take on the deal. It is not a new scenario by any stretch. Many teams have discovered tricks in the past which led to performances which had everyone shaking their heads, as far back as the Ponchos of Cotton Owens, the Ford's of the Wood Brothers, The Plymouths of the Pettys, the Chevys of Junior Johnson, the Chevys of Jeff Gordon and on and on. For me it is part and parcel of racing, always has been.

The other teams will catch up. they always, ALWAYS, do. We may never know the secret for sure, we still do not know for a fact what the Elliotts had, but RCR seems close already and the others will not be far behind.

Great to be back and thanks again. See ya in print!! ;)
 
That has to be the most reasonable, knowledgeble, and unbiased post i have seen on this topic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom