Why do a lot of you guys hate plate racing?

hendrickfreak

hendrickfreak

Crew Chief
Joined
Sep 27, 2017
Messages
182
Points
53
Why do alot of you hate plate racing? It's my favorite. The action, the wrecks, the excitement. I just don't get it.
(I'm new btw)
 
Last edited:
Who said we hate it man? I like it but the yellow line rule needs to be removed.
 
Time to sit back and grab my popcorn and watch this thread play out
giphy.gif
 
Welcome to the forum! I do in fact hate, loathe, and detest it, and have since freaking 1988. I don't want to get in another pissing match about it. If the curiosity is genuine, I'll try to elucidate why later.
 
I'd like them better if they didn't wreck all the damn cars at the end of the race and ruin the finish.
 
jws926 said:
I like plate racing very much , up till the point they start and continue on crashing.
Click to expand...

I had a great time doing a mud run race once, until I had to do laundry. I guess that didn't invalidate the fun, but I should have known it was coming.
 
gnomesayin said:
I had a great time doing a mud run race once, until I had to do laundry. I guess that didn't invalidate the fun, but I should have known it was coming.
Click to expand...
I am happy for you?

Look G, I respect you, but I am not going to get into a debate over this with ya, I just dont care, I like plate racing , or let me say, I can enjoy the closeness of a full field of cars running at 200mph, the rest, sure it a crapshoot and its far from the being anything cloee the best racing.
 
I was just joking around. I don't think it's a good idea to debate it either. Some inherently like it. I inherently didn't from the moment I laid eyes on it. There's no getting around it. If someone truly doesn't know the reasons it is disliked, i can explain them. But I'm not looking to change minds that are made up.
 
jws926 said:
I like plate racing very much , up till the point they start and continue on crashing.
Click to expand...
Pretty much this right here. It's an awesome sight to see 40 cars running 195 miles an hour within a second and a half of each other. It's exciting to know everyone in the field could possibly win the race. However, NASCAR says plates are for the driver's safety, but really all they've done is cause massive crashes and driver and fan injuries. Manufactured drama, manufactured racing, and manufactured highlight reels like Carl Edwards or Austin Dillon's crashes that will be played for years to come.
 
gnomesayin said:
I was just joking around. I don't think it's a good idea to debate it either. Some inherently like it. I inherently didn't from the moment I laid eyes on it. There's no getting around it. If someone truly doesn't know the reasons it is disliked, i can explain them. But I'm not looking to change minds that are made up.
Click to expand...
Its hard to tell with text sometimes ya know

I understand the reason's why people hate it, I hate for those same reason's too, but I also can enjoy plate racing at that same time.
 
  • Because the rules for plate racing are different from what they are every other week - yellow lines, qualifying format, etc.
  • Because pulling away from the field is a disadvantage
  • Because qualifying is irrelevant. Where you start has less influence on where you finish a plate race than anywhere else. All it determines of value is choice of pit position.
  • Corollary to the above: because running up front on the last lap is a disadvantage
  • Because it requires a driver to have 'friends' to win
  • Corollary to the above: because it requires drivers to pit in groups, so even your pit stall isn't important either.
  • But mostly because it forces the cars into a big pack, magnifying the effects of a single driver's mistake on the rest of the field, more so than at any other style of racing or form of track.
Plates are a work-around for two tracks where unrestricted modern cars would run too fast for spectator safety, a cludge to compensate for the tracks' owner refusing to update them. They're not there for driver safety. They're to keep the cars from going through the fences, which would result spectator deaths and injuries, negative publicity, and (most important to prevent) lawsuits. Lately, they don't even do those things particularly well.

I don't know what the reaction was when plates were first used, but I know people would scream if we tried to implement them from scratch today, or expand their use to other tracks. Indeed, people did scream last summer when they were rolled out for the Indianapolis Xfinity race.
 
Last edited:
Larsonfan1995 said:
Pretty much this right here. It's an awesome sight to see 40 cars running 195 miles an hour within a second and a half of each other. It's exciting to know everyone in the field could possibly win the race. However, NASCAR says plates are for the driver's safety, but really all they've done is cause massive crashes and driver and fan injuries. Manufactured drama, manufactured racing, and manufactured highlight reels like Carl Edwards or Austin Dillon's crashes that will be played for years to come.
Click to expand...
The wrecks make great hightlight packages for sure.
 
gnomesayin said:
Welcome to the forum! I do in fact hate, loathe, and detest it, and have since freaking 1988. I don't want to get in another pissing match about it. If the curiosity is genuine, I'll try to elucidate why later.
Click to expand...
I second this, it's the worst aspect of Nascar.
 
Plate racing was all I knew growing up as I started off going to Daytona every year. I've always loved it. It is frustrating in the sense that the best car rarely wins and it takes an insane amount of good fortune just to make it to the end, let alone win the things. As a fan, they're nerve wrecking to watch.
 
Plate racing came about because of Bobby Allisons spectacular crash in the Winston 500 at Talladega in 1987. The plates were introduced at a time when the cars were not nearly identical from an aero standpoint. I don't think the plates have accomplished what NASCAR had intended, as evidenced by the Kyle Larson Xfinity crash a few years ago at Daytona. IIRC the original intended purpose was to enhance fan safety. A few pieces of debris from Allisons car hit some fans. I don't remember any serious injuries though. Also Allisons car took out a chunk of the catch fence. NASCAR crew chiefs, engine builders and such will always find a way to reclaim lost speed due to plates. If NASCAR wants to slow the cars down for everyones safety, make them more "stock" in appearance. Return to a bias ply tire, make racing more about the driver than having 40 identical cars on the track. Slow the cars aero wise. And at some point, another driver will be seriously injured or worse. And I do understand they could get seriously injured at Martinsville. It's a lot less likely though. What we'll watch Sunday is fairly predictable. Just my 2cents.
 
AdoubleU24 said:
Plate racing was all I knew growing up as I started off going to Daytona every year. I've always loved it. It is frustrating in the sense that the best car rarely wins and it takes an insane amount of good fortune just to make it to the end, let alone win the things. As a fan, they're nerve wrecking to watch.
Click to expand...
It wasn't always like that, 60s, 70s, and early to mid 80s had great racing without plates. None of the huge pack racing crap and very few huge wrecks that took out half the field.
 
jws926 said:
People like seeing wrecks, therefore, say with it me, makes for good highlight package.
Click to expand...
No, I will not say with that phrase, what I will say is it ruins races, costs millions in bent up race cars, puts drivers at more risk for injury, and it's boring watching 200 laps of nothing only to see 50 laps of mayem.
 
jws926 said:
People like seeing wrecks, therefore, say with it me, makes for good highlight package.
Click to expand...


You are correct, people love to see big crashes. I'd rather see a great race to the end. Big crashes are far too costly, and the potential for harm to drivers and fans alike is going to be devastating some day. 3400 pound missles traveling at 200 mph can be deadly, no matter how big the plates, roof and cowl flaps, and catch fences. Too much aero and horsepower ain't always a good thing.
 
I second all of Charlie's points. In essence, the development of the cars outgrew Daytona and Talladega as configured. Rather than adopt a temporary solution to slow the cars down until the tracks could be reconfigured, they stumbled into a band-aid fix that turned out to be more popular than the original because of its artificial "closeness".

NASCAR has been correct with the lower downforce movement. Making the cars more challenging to drive, higher top speeds but slower in the corners, more speed differential, bringing car and throttle control into play - - this is the type of racing I support. Plate racing is the antithesis of that. Drivers holding the gas to the floor in essentially underpowered cars, subject to the whims of the pack and with their outcome much more out of their hands than in any other type of race I've ever seen.

What's funny is that while I barely watch the plate races, when I play one of the video games, plate racing seems kind of fun. I think that gets at something. Plate racing is a more fantastical version of what takes place the other 34 weeks of the year, an entertaining diversion if you don't take it too seriously.

I do take racing seriously. If they were exhibitions or less meaningful, I might be able to let loose and enjoy the crazy spectacle. I resent that for 30 years now, the sport's most prestigious race has been contested under these conditions. The ability to excel at the superspeedways used to really convey something about a driver's ability. Now for three decades it's been the Derrick Cope / Michael Waltrip / Trevor Bayne era of the 500. You gotta watch out for David Ragan at the plate tracks, he's good at those. And that's a positive?

I have never been one to say that plate racing doesn't require an innate ability that some have more of than others. Some are better at it clearly. This alone is not meaningful. Some would be better if the cars were restricted to 30 mph. Some would better if they held a parallel parking competition on pit road. I do believe that plate racing plainly requires less traditional racing skills than any other discipline.

Those are my thoughts for now.
 
mack said:
You are correct, people love to see big crashes. I'd rather see a great race to the end. Big crashes are far too costly, and the potential for harm to drivers and fans alike is going to be devastating some day. 3400 pound missles traveling at 200 mph can be deadly, no matter how big the plates, roof and cowl flaps, and catch fences. Too much aero and horsepower ain't always a good thing.
Click to expand...
LOL, ok lets try this one more time, I was agreeing with @Larsonfan1995 , NASCAR media loves to use hightlights, that they put in to a , wait for it, highlight package , which then they use to promote the plate races.

None of us here are saying we love to see the wrecks.
 
Plate racing as a whole
Spotter22 said:
From 1960 to 1990 the Daytona 500 had less then 5 races with more than 5 cars on the lead lap.
Click to expand...
only 2 years in your time described did NASCAR utilize restrictor plates, as the OP title suggests.
 
I dont hate plate racing in general.

Just what its become since the gen6 car was introduced is not entertaining to watch until <5 laps to go.
 
Yes, the historical NASCAR was such crap before these modern enhancements. I don't know how anyone could stomach those old races, let alone pay to watch them willingly. If only they would have a stage break with 5 to go, everyone waved around to the lead lap, anyone who has wrecked out can bring their backup car, the results would be astounding and oh so close.
 
gnomesayin said:
I second all of Charlie's points. In essence, the development of the cars outgrew Daytona and Talladega as configured. Rather than adopt a temporary solution to slow the cars down until the tracks could be reconfigured, they stumbled into a band-aid fix that turned out to be more popular than the original because of its artificial "closeness".

NASCAR has been correct with the lower downforce movement. Making the cars more challenging to drive, higher top speeds but slower in the corners, more speed differential, bringing car and throttle control into play - - this is the type of racing I support. Plate racing is the antithesis of that. Drivers holding the gas to the floor in essentially underpowered cars, subject to the whims of the pack and with their outcome much more out of their hands than in any other type of race I've ever seen.

What's funny is that while I barely watch the plate races, when I play one of the video games, plate racing seems kind of fun. I think that gets at something. Plate racing is a more fantastical version of what takes place the other 34 weeks of the year, an entertaining diversion if you don't take it too seriously.

I do take racing seriously. If they were exhibitions or less meaningful, I might be able to let loose and enjoy the crazy spectacle. I resent that for 30 years now, the sport's most prestigious race has been contested under these conditions. The ability to excel at the superspeedways used to really convey something about a driver's ability. Now for three decades it's been the Derrick Cope / Michael Waltrip / Trevor Bayne era of the 500. You gotta watch out for David Ragan at the plate tracks, he's good at those. And that's a positive?

I have never been one to say that plate racing doesn't require an innate ability that some have more of than others. Some are better at it clearly. This alone is not meaningful. Some would be better if the cars were restricted to 30 mph. Some would better if they held a parallel parking competition on pit road. I do believe that plate racing plainly requires less traditional racing skills than any other discipline.

Those are my thoughts for now.
Click to expand...
Spot on, plate racing isn't true racing. Spotter says not as many cars weren't on the lead lap without plates, and this is a bad thing why?
 
gnomesayin said:
Yes, the historical NASCAR was such crap before these modern enhancements. I don't know how anyone could stomach those old races, let alone pay to watch them willingly. If only they would have a stage break with 5 to go, everyone waved around to the lead lap, anyone who has wrecked out can bring their backup car, the results would be astounding and oh so close.
Click to expand...
Back when you had 2 single line packs of 6 or 7 cars, stategy was different, but you could come from far back to get to the front. Drafting actually worked, and was awesome to watch. People put way too much emphasis on the entire field needing to be on the lead lap. The fastest car should win, that's not always the case in plate racing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom