Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

    Also, there may be some issues with engine suppliers...
    http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...nce-stephenson
    "But, first, let us now praise famous moments, because something happened Tuesday night in Indianapolis that you can watch a lifetime’s worth of professional basketball and never see again. There was a brief, and very decisive, and altogether unprecedented, outburst of genuine officiating, and it was directed at the best player in the world, and that, my dear young person, simply is not done."

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

      Bruce Martin>INSIDE RACING

      Wheldon's fatal crash prompts closer look at Vegas fence design

      In Nevada, and at sister Speedway Motorsports Inc. (SMI) tracks in Texas, Kentucky and New Hampshire, the steel supports are on the racetrack side, with the fencing located behind them on the grandstand side. At Indianapolis Motor Speedway and all non-SMI tracks on the 2011 schedule, the fencing is on the racetrack side, with the steel supports behind them on the grandstand side.

      Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz1c8pebKhI
      Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz1c8pS48Z4

      This surprised me because I know a ruckus was made over this issue following another car getting into the fence. Either Brack's or Hamilton's IIRC. I thought at the time the IRL had mandated the issue was going to change. But apparently not.... Not only that but from the article and interviews it would appear no further testing was done either.

      I'm not going to pretend to know how much this issue matters in general or to this particular accident, but considering I know the issue of the posts has been at the forefront of an accident in the past I'm a little surprised series officials don't have some data on this and studies to point to.
      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

      ------

      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

      -John Wooden

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

        Excellent article. Sounds like somebody at 16th and Georgetown dropped the ball on following up on this. Or they decided they didn't give a ****...I don't know what kind of raving lunatic would think having the posts trackside is a good idea. The euros picked up on that about the same time we introduced them to seat belts.
        http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...nce-stephenson
        "But, first, let us now praise famous moments, because something happened Tuesday night in Indianapolis that you can watch a lifetime’s worth of professional basketball and never see again. There was a brief, and very decisive, and altogether unprecedented, outburst of genuine officiating, and it was directed at the best player in the world, and that, my dear young person, simply is not done."

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

          I'd like to hear some more inside scoop on this fence issue. What it smells like is that Indycar didn't have the clout to get tracks to change their fencing so they made the choice to run the tracks as-is versus their only other alternative... refusing to run the tracks until this was changed (fully knowing the tracks would just shrug and say "no Indycar then").

          If that is true then there probably wasn't much testing or research done on the issue because they probably didn't want to know what the data might show.

          Hopefully I'm wrong....
          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

          ------

          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

          -John Wooden

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

            Full article- http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/95688


            Zanardi hits out at pack racing in IndyCar following Wheldon's death

            "As I often say, it's not speed the cause of such a crash. If anything, it could be an aggravating factor," Zanardi said in an interview with Autosprint magazine.

            "My early years of oval racing, up to 1998, were always very dangerous. Back then, setting up the car meant finding a compromise on the car's speed. You would let it slide until the downforce wasn't yet too low in a way that penalises turn speed too much.

            "It was drift driving, and tyre degradation was an important parameter. If a driver crashed against the wall, it was usually his own mistake after he had underestimated these factors.

            "Nowadays, instead, driving has become too easy. At turn entry, mid turn, and turn exit, the car is attached to the road surface. In the name of safety - in principle it was even right - the intention was to slow down the cars by giving them an exaggerated amount of downforce, and therefore high drag.

            "The result was that, in order to find speed, you now see set-ups with the front being 7cm higher than the rear to lessen the wing's influence! This is nonsense, but it's a necessity to beat the stop watch."
            He's not a fan of the Handford device:
            "At the beginning of 1998, the Handford wing was introduced in our series. It was a sort of an L-shaped Gurney flap attached backwards, and it was supposed to slow down the cars by generating drag. After the first race I, Michael Andretti and Greg Moore were literally assaulted by enthusiastic journalists who would say what a great race it was, what spectacle.

            "We looked at each other and, without having agreed beforehand, we replied simultaneously: 'Have you seen the same race as us?'

            "For us it had been crap: with the Handford you couldn't open up a gap to your rival anymore.

            "Our job wasn't to race anymore, it was to wait to catch the final slipstream. No more talent, just strategy and that's it. In the long term, this has made the Indy audience fall out of love too.
            And another voice confirming what I believe to be the obvious-

            "With these cars, instead, you drive by always keeping the inside white line as your reference, just because that's the shortest line; the car is glued to the track anyway. But I prefer to race with 1,000 bhp while having to manage the car, instead of nowadays' 650 bhp and these absurd levels of grip."
            Last edited by Bball; 10-29-2011, 10:30 PM.
            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

            ------

            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

            -John Wooden

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

              Originally posted by Bball View Post
              I'd like to hear some more inside scoop on this fence issue. What it smells like is that Indycar didn't have the clout to get tracks to change their fencing so they made the choice to run the tracks as-is versus their only other alternative... refusing to run the tracks until this was changed (fully knowing the tracks would just shrug and say "no Indycar then").

              If that is true then there probably wasn't much testing or research done on the issue because they probably didn't want to know what the data might show.

              Hopefully I'm wrong....
              I asked, and you are not far off the mark.
              http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...nce-stephenson
              "But, first, let us now praise famous moments, because something happened Tuesday night in Indianapolis that you can watch a lifetime’s worth of professional basketball and never see again. There was a brief, and very decisive, and altogether unprecedented, outburst of genuine officiating, and it was directed at the best player in the world, and that, my dear young person, simply is not done."

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

                An interview with Bruce Ashmore

                Ashmore believes IndyCar needs a much more open rule book aimed at encouraging multiple car builders and more exciting cars. But he's convinced the IndyCar organization is lost amid the maze of spec car thinking and has given up any faith in a free and open market.



                The Way It Is/ An opportunity lost?
                by Gordon Kirby

                Last week I discussed the problems with racing Indy cars on high-banked ovals with Bruce Ashmore. At the end of last week's column Ashmore said he believes IndyCar has made only minor incremental changes both in terms of crash safety and eliminating safety problems with the dreaded 'pack racing'. This week we explore more of Ashmore's analysis of the new Dallara and discuss what the correct formula should be for Indy cars.

                First of all, most fans and all the drivers, past and present, want to see more power. The fans want the drivers to lift for the corners, use the brakes, then get back on the power and drive their cars, using their advantage in every area to cleanly execute a pass rather than droning around in packs straining for lap after lap to gain the tiniest advantage. Using the brakes and throttle to best effect is what automobile racing was all about for most of a century until NASCAR invented restrictor plate racing and the IRL followed suit with its squalid little formula.

                Personally, I think the classic CART car with tiny speedway wings was as elegant an Indy car as there's ever been. It worked well and put on a good show on all types of tracks with plenty of power--900 and upwards of 1,000 horsepower--to be able to pass and race back and forth. It was necessary to get out of the throttle for the corners and possibly use the brakes, then judiciously get back on the power. Ashmore believes the 2012 Dallara-Honda/Chevy/Lotus combination is only a small step in the direction of the old CART formula and falls far short of the objective.

                "They're trying to go somewhere else to create what was there before," Ashmore remarks. "Well, that's not right. Go back to what was there before. I'm sure you can attain what was there before if you go back to that formula. There was nothing wrong with it. So just re-run it."

                Ashmore has no doubts the power needs to be substantially increased.


                "It needs to be 1,000 horsepower," he declares. "Going to 550 or 700 bhp is nothing. It's not enough of a change to make it interesting. It needs to be 1,000 horsepower. Then on the road and street courses and the mile ovals the cars will be a handful and will be hard to drive.

                "You never hear the drivers talk today about how hard the cars are to drive. When I came into CART in the eighties every weekend was a struggle about how to keep the tires under the driver. You worked on that all the time trying to get the car through the whole race. But now everything is the same through the whole race. Everyone goes 'round and 'round at exactly the same speed with no change. They're not being strained. They're too easy to drive. And nobody can pass."

                It's true not only on oval tracks but also at road courses like Mid-Ohio and Infineon Raceway where passing is equally impossible and a procession ensues looking more like Indy Lights or GP2 cars than full-blooded Indy cars. Given that the new formula is likely to retain the same characteristics as the old one the new Dallara's bodywork has been designed to attempt to reduce the chance of wheels interlocking and cars flying. The idea was a key component in Ashmore's BAT design and he believes the new Dallara doesn't go far enough in this regard.



                "I've wanted to stop wheels interlocking and tread to tread contact for some time," Ashmore comments. "I worked on it and discussed it in the CART days and then in the IRL. When you're cornering at the maximum of the vehicle's grip as soon as the tires touch each other tread to tread one car lifts off the road and it goes sideways and then the crash happens.

                "They think they've made some steps on that but they've still designed a car with a flimsy front wing, a flimsy piece of bodywork around the front wheels and no bodywork behind the rear of the front tire. The front tire is still exposed so you can still have a tread to tread or interlocking wheel accident which is what starts the flying accident. And that will still happen with the new car. They think they've solved it because that was in their mandate. But if you look at what they've designed the bodywork is not strong enough to stop the start of the accident."


                Ashmore also believes not enough attention has been paid to the driver's seating position.

                "I think the drivers need to sit more upright so they don't crush the driver's spine when they crash," he suggests. "I don't believe the seat is that much different in the new Dallara. They've made a change but it's only a small step. It's not a big enough change. We knew that the CART car had a problem and we needed to sit the driver in a more upright position.

                "I know from the study I made to design our BAT car that the car you needed to make would not fit into an Indy car transporter. You need a more upright seating position and another four or five inches above the driver's head for the roll hoop and it's too tall to go into an Indy car transporter. It would have to go in a NASCAR transporter. But they specified the car had to fit in the current IndyCar transporter because the teams couldn't afford scrapping or modifying all their transporters.



                "So everything is a compromise. They spent all that time going to a new car and then they boxed themselves into a corner.
                Then on top of all that they've further compromised it by telling the teams they've got to race on NASCAR racetracks."

                Ashmore has a bleak view of the process that took place in last year's contest for IndyCar's 2012 car. He believes each of the contestants was used unethically by IndyCar and Dallara to produce the new car.

                "In my view the way they went about it was quite dishonest. All of us competing car builders had to sign our ideas away. All our ideas went into a pot and we had to sign a document saying that if we didn't win the contract they kept our ideas.

                "That's one thing, but the sad part is they awarded the contract to a racing car building company in Italy who are just building another in a range of racing cars. It's a lot like their other cars and they're not using all the ideas that we put forward. They're only scratching the surface and, as I say, making a five percent step. They completely ignored a lot of what we suggested. They've just done what they felt like.

                "All of our ideas and Lola's ideas and Swift's and the Delta Wing group's ideas went in and they took our ideas to make this new car. But they only took a small portion of them so that they've only made a five percent step. So what's the point?"

                Ashmore remains dismayed and deeply disappointed with the way the Iconic committee's decision unfolded.

                "I put my heart and soul into the design of a car that I believe they wanted to win the bid. I designed what I thought should have been the next Indy car and it could have been used as a rule book or it could have been used as a spec car. I offered it both ways. It would have been a spec car built in Indianapolis with Indianapolis companies and suppliers. Or it could have been used as a rule book.

                "We lost the bid because the winner put in a business plan, not a plan for the car. It was a building on Main Street in Speedway and a business plan for the build and supply of all the cars but nothing for the design of the car. The rest of us believed we were putting in a plan for the design of a car and that the winner would be the best design.


                "I stand by the car I designed. It would have been a game-changer. It was a much bigger step change than what Dallara has done."

                Ashmore also believes IndyCar has set Dallara up for some difficult if not impossible budget-balancing.

                "They've been stuck to a budget," he says. "They've been told what price to sell the car for. People don't understand that when you dictate that you've got to have this carbon fiber chassis and carbon fiber wings and a lighter aluminum gearbox. They've dictated a lot of the more expensive items in the manufacturing but they've also dictated the sales price too. It's ridiculous.

                "If you really want to have a cheaper price and better product then let the rules be open about the materials. Maybe you would use a lot more steel fabrication and the weight would go up but it would be cheaper. I believe the weight they set was unrealistically light and the materials are unrealistically expensive, so they have to compromise."

                Ashmore is equally sure that IndyCar's 2012 engine rules are too restrictive.

                "If you look at the rules that they've saddled Chevy, Honda and Lotus with, they're going to build the same thing. Okay, there will be three different badges on three different engines but the rules are so tight that you can't make anything really different."

                Nor is he aware of much if any activity in the Dallara project from the American or Indianapolis racing industry's component manufacturers and suppliers.

                "The cars are being built in Italy and the gearboxes (Xtrac) are being built in England," Ashmore says. "I don't know anybody in America who's making components for that car which is very sad because IndyCar seem to have conned the government officials in Indianapolis along with the Indiana tax payers who ultimately are footing the bill for the grants to the team owners to subsidize the purchase of this new car, a car that was supposed to have had its components made in America."

                Ashmore believes IndyCar needs a much more open rule book aimed at encouraging multiple car builders and more exciting cars. But he's convinced the IndyCar organization is lost amid the maze of spec car thinking and has given up any faith in a free and open market.

                "You need to have a rulebook with a few simple rules," he says. "You've got to come up with something that reduces the downforce. The price will take care of itself because as soon as you've got competition in the pitlane one guy will figure out how to make a cheaper car and will outsell the other guy. That's what happened before in the CART days and that's what they need to do again. You need to have multiple chassis builders and multiple engine builders and you need to not run them on the tracks we know they don't work on."

                Ashmore is a big believer in IndyCar returning to America's great road courses and developing a schedule of races much like CART enjoyed at its height.

                "They need to go back to nice venues like Laguna Seca and Elkhart Lake," he comments. "The reason I thought CART worked so well was it had a very good mix of venues. The teams were owned by wealthy car owners and they wanted to go to nice places and they would bring along their friends who would bring along sponsors. So as the cost went up the sponsorship went up but there were nice places to go to. I thought it was really clever.

                "We went to Canada in Toronto and Vancouver and then when we went outside North America we went to Surfers Paradise in Australia. All of them were really nice places and attractive to sponsors. Almost every race was a nice race to go to. There were a few odd ones like the Michigan 500 but they thought they ought to race there because it was near Detroit.

                "It was fun and it worked, but you go in the paddock today and everyone is miserable. They don't have any sponsorship and they don't enjoy the cars or venues. They don't know why they're doing it."

                Ashmore reflected on how CART's many managers and marketing men told the teams and the car and engine builders through the organization's hedays that the fans turned out only to see the drivers. There was little or no appeal in the cars or engines claimed those many geniuses who helped drive CART into the ground.

                "When it was 1,000 horsepower and four engine companies were going at it and you had all the combinations of three different chassis and four engines we were always told that wasn't what the fans came to see," Ashmore recalls. "We were told they came to see the star drivers and we always wondered how true that was. We used to ask let's see what happens when everybody is driving the same equipment. Let's see how many fans you've got. I guess we have the answer to that today don't we?"

                We've witnessed a sad, inexorably silly and lethal story over the past fifteen years. The lack of leadership, technically and otherwise, has been stunning. And so it continues.
                http://www.gordonkirby.com/categorie..._is_no310.html
                Last edited by Bball; 11-01-2011, 03:59 AM.
                Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                ------

                "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                -John Wooden

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

                  The best rant on the subject, ever!!!
                  http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...nce-stephenson
                  "But, first, let us now praise famous moments, because something happened Tuesday night in Indianapolis that you can watch a lifetime’s worth of professional basketball and never see again. There was a brief, and very decisive, and altogether unprecedented, outburst of genuine officiating, and it was directed at the best player in the world, and that, my dear young person, simply is not done."

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

                    Originally posted by DaveP63 View Post
                    The best rant on the subject, ever!!!
                    I agree. There was so much I agree with that I had a hard time finding things to highlight. I wanted to highlight entire thing.

                    This has been my overriding thought for some time:
                    Ashmore believes IndyCar needs a much more open rule book aimed at encouraging multiple car builders and more exciting cars. But he's convinced the IndyCar organization is lost amid the maze of spec car thinking and has given up any faith in a free and open market.

                    They need to step outside the box that has them thinking this spec car BS is actually saving teams money. If it's lowering fan interest then it's also COSTING them money. Let alone not forget the idea that with competition and budgets it's going to naturally control costs.

                    As for any ideas about Nascar having the right idea.... Has anyone been looking at the stands in Nascar lately?
                    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                    ------

                    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                    -John Wooden

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

                      Originally posted by Bball View Post
                      I agree. There was so much I agree with that I had a hard time finding things to highlight. I wanted to highlight entire thing.

                      This has been my overriding thought for some time:
                      Ashmore believes IndyCar needs a much more open rule book aimed at encouraging multiple car builders and more exciting cars. But he's convinced the IndyCar organization is lost amid the maze of spec car thinking and has given up any faith in a free and open market.

                      They need to step outside the box that has them thinking this spec car BS is actually saving teams money. If it's lowering fan interest then it's also COSTING them money. Let alone not forget the idea that with competition and budgets it's going to naturally control costs.

                      As for any ideas about Nascar having the right idea.... Has anyone been looking at the stands in Nascar lately?
                      Yes, yes and hell yes. The whole swindle of the spec cars in Indycar was because of the owners mooing about how expensive it was. Now there are a myriad of reasons why, but here are a few. Sole source supply was essentially mandated when they they killed off the little shops in Gasoline Alley that used to do all the fab work for the teams. How did that happen? Easy. The non Dallara parts had to meet such requirements it became cost prohibitive to produce them. Everyone was forced to buy Dallara parts. Then they began to charge what ever the hell they wanted for the parts. You would not believe how much markup went into the spares. It was as bad or worse for the Indy Lights cars. It would literally make you vomit. There was a parts shortage for the last several years manufactured by Dallara because they quit making spares. Guess who gobbled up all the spares? Want to know what caused a lot of crashes? Worn out parts. I know of at least two crashes from one team this year that were caused by running parts that should have been in a dumpster. Simona's "new car" that she ran at Indy was only 3-4 years old. The one she finished out the year in (never question her courage) was about 7-8 years old and should have been a static display. Because, guess who had all the "new" cars held back as spares?

                      Swift had a design that would have undercut Dallara for the new car. Lola would have kicked their ***, but they've been in bed with them for so long they can't say no. You just wait and see how soon the prices increase. Don't get me started on the engine lease swindle.
                      http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...nce-stephenson
                      "But, first, let us now praise famous moments, because something happened Tuesday night in Indianapolis that you can watch a lifetime’s worth of professional basketball and never see again. There was a brief, and very decisive, and altogether unprecedented, outburst of genuine officiating, and it was directed at the best player in the world, and that, my dear young person, simply is not done."

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

                        My only question is how do you take it away from spec racing without going back to "which Penske driver will win" as the only unanswered question about any given race? I say this even while admitting that in recent years it has pretty much come to a few teams again, but even that is better than the foregone conclusion which was basically spec racing within a single team.

                        If you find Nascar's championship "competition" at all uninspiring, why would single-team dominance be something to get excited about again?
                        BillS

                        A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                        Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

                          Originally posted by BillS View Post
                          My only question is how do you take it away from spec racing without going back to "which Penske driver will win" as the only unanswered question about any given race? I say this even while admitting that in recent years it has pretty much come to a few teams again, but even that is better than the foregone conclusion which was basically spec racing within a single team.

                          If you find Nascar's championship "competition" at all uninspiring, why would single-team dominance be something to get excited about again?
                          Is the manufactured racing of spec cars really any more intriguing? And that is assuming you dumb the cars down enough that any driver could win on any given Sunday. But doing that, what do you accomplish if the best teams and best drivers can't necessarily win because they are the best? And so what if Penske (or whoever the next Super Team is) wins a lot of races with a less spec format? Shouldn't the best team and drivers win?

                          And if a team does figure something out that gives them a huge advantage that should give others in the paddock something to try and figure out for themselves or find something else. If the team with the advantage stinks up too many shows/seasons you could always go back to the rulebook to negate some of their technical or financial advantage.

                          That all said, Penske does have a competitor now in Ganassi. I don't think it would matter if they were racing spec cars, fully open formula cars, or soap box derby cars.... those two teams would be competing at the top. Why shouldn't they reap the rewards of their hard work?

                          To me, racing has always been about the pursuit of speed thru technology and a driver capable of putting that to use on the track. I never have a problem watching a car pull away from the field.

                          Nascar has dumbed down racing to the point where I couldn't really tell you what is happening with the chase. It's boring and nap inducing watching Nascar these days. Indycar doesn't need to emulate that in any way, shape, or form....
                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

                          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

                            Penske has another big kid on the block in the Chipster. AGR used to have the largest engineering budget when they were the big team. That's what money buys you. Engineering. Shaker rigs, wind tunnels, coast down tests, testing, testing, testing. The ability to have full time people fitting body panels so they are perfect. Reducing drag. Machining. Figuring out how to make things lighter...You know...Cheating...

                            Everyone is always going to buy the best moustrap (chassis) they can afford. They best way to "regulate" is through the engines, specifically the ECU. Have the engines at a set horsepower limit, seal them up and make it part of the tech inspection and hand out the sealed ECUs to the teams for the duration of the event and then take them back. They can have 1 ECU to used for testing or whatever. You can also limit in season testing.
                            http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...nce-stephenson
                            "But, first, let us now praise famous moments, because something happened Tuesday night in Indianapolis that you can watch a lifetime’s worth of professional basketball and never see again. There was a brief, and very decisive, and altogether unprecedented, outburst of genuine officiating, and it was directed at the best player in the world, and that, my dear young person, simply is not done."

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

                              It's sort of like the whole "rich owner" situation in the NBA. I grew up a Hurtibise/Ruby type fan and still have a soft spot for the Sarah Fishers out there trying to compete with the huge money guys.

                              I want racing to be about the best driving, not necessarily about the best gadgets. I understand that there's an unintended consequence when everyone is pack racing, but I'd like to see a fix for that that doesn't go all the way back to the old days.
                              BillS

                              A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                              Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

                                I've said before and I'll keep saying, it should be COMPLETELY wide open. The best drivers are going to gravitate to the best teams with the biggest budgets and the most tech anyway no matter what you do so the only thing left to do is have a basic rule book.

                                The car must have 4 wheels
                                the car must have a front and rear wing (or not)
                                the car must be so many inches long, wide, and high

                                Other than that, give it your best shot and throw your badass toy out there and dare the other guy's badass toy to do better.

                                Now THAT'S a race I'd watch.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X