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

2015 Indycar Thread

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

  • #76
    Re: 2015 Indycar Thread

    Originally posted by BillS View Post
    See, I disagree with this. I think "getting away from spec racing" is code for "let Penske win", as it was for years. This is not just on the team drivers, good as they are, but because of the money available to squeeze every little ounce of performance from a car or make mods that are legal but that no one else has the stable of a dozen cars to test with.

    All I really want is to get back to the days where a driver who is good actually has a chance to win if their team isn't either Penske or Ganassi. Otherwise, it's just intramurals.

    Every sport has the cream that rises to the top. It would be bad for the NBA if Lebron was forced to lose 25 pounds of muscle just so the field would be more even. The fans rejected the IRL spec driven "vision" by the millions in the 90's and the sport will never recover, even though it is infinitely better now than it was back in the late 90's when those putrid IRL teams that no longer exist were posing as real racing teams with dentists and Racin' Gardner driving the hallowed Indy 500. The 500 only became worth watching again once the Penskes and Ganassis came back (Montoya smoking the field in 2000, CART teams taking the top 6 spots in 01 and humiliating the George family). 20 years after the control-driven vision, and CART drivers are still dominating.

    I wonder how many people remember that the 1995 CART Championship AND Indy 500 (last pre-split) were won by a second year driver and team (Villenueve/Team Green)? Penske didn't even qualify for the 500 that year.

    Spec racing is for staged NASCRAP draft racing. The heritage of Indy racing was a competition that revolved around building the best machine. That's what made the 500 so great.

    Penske is going to win regardless of whether it's spec racing or old school racing. He's dominated ever since he humiliated the IRL teams in 2001. He'll figure a way out regardless of what the limitations are. That's what the best do.
    Last edited by Sollozzo; 06-10-2015, 11:14 AM.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: 2015 Indycar Thread

      Originally posted by BillS View Post
      See, I disagree with this. I think "getting away from spec racing" is code for "let Penske win", as it was for years. This is not just on the team drivers, good as they are, but because of the money available to squeeze every little ounce of performance from a car or make mods that are legal but that no one else has the stable of a dozen cars to test with.

      All I really want is to get back to the days where a driver who is good actually has a chance to win if their team isn't either Penske or Ganassi. Otherwise, it's just intramurals.
      This to me sounds like the kind of thinking that sent Indycar to the abyss and has shiny aluminum seats showing up at more and more Nascar races.

      Fans don't want manufactured racing. That's all spec racing is. It doesn't allow good drivers to shine. It just brings great drivers back to the pack. As for Penske, he'd win no matter the rules. He makes sure and has the best crew and best drivers and operates like a well-oiled machine. Ganassi looks to do the same thing. And both have the resources to make it work. So to beat those guys you better bring your A game whether it's spec racing or "run what you brung".

      I'll never forget in the early years of the IRL watching pit strategies that would make you scratch your head and wonder what they were thinking. It wasn't simply going off sequence type strategies... it was shear stupidity type strategies. Things like the leader not pitting when everyone else would pit. Then compounding that by deciding since everyone else pitted they should pit too the next time around. Thus sending him to the back of the field after his stop.

      While people like close, exciting racing, they want it to be about talent or machinery.... Not everybody driving the same car, and the car glued down with so much mandated downforce that it made luck as much (or more) important than the driver.

      The 500 thrived without needing year after year of tight racing for the lead. It didn't need 33 cars on the same lap at the end. To me, it's just the remnants of the spec racing era worried about one brand now having an advantage. Especially when that advantage isn't exactly leaving the other team at the rear. There are Hondas beating some Chevy drivers every race.

      To put it in perspective, let's consider a display of the 99 winning Indy 500 cars. For year after year the cars will hold interest on a number of levels for spectators admiring the exhibit. And then we get to the later parts of the modern era and it'll be just a matter of comparing the paint jobs more than anything. There's not really any need in having cars from each year when they are basically the same. That had to hurt Indycar, even if it did tighten the racing.

      Now add in artificially capping the speeds and progress. And doing it over and over again.

      And then people wonder why Indycar lost the imagination of the public?

      Meanwhile, for whatever reason, Nascar decided to go down the same spec racing path and the resulting drop in interest was almost immediately.

      Maybe there is some wisdom in keeping the racing somewhat tight. And obviously safety is a factor to always be considered. But at least try and keep the perception of innovation and speed alive, even if you manage the reality in the background. Don't just dumb the product down and tell us it's great.
      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


      • #78
        Re: 2015 Indycar Thread

        Excellent post, Bball.

        Racing is made up of two components that hold roughly the same importance to the fans: the drivers and the machines. Tony George in his power grabbing paranoia managed to nuke both of those things. Guaranteeing spots in the hallowed Indianapolis 500 with the 25/8 rule to racers who participated in (literally) a Mickey Mouse (Walt Disney World 200) outlaw league destroyed the chain of excellence that could be traced back to Ray Harroun. It was the ultimate sin and rendered the Indy 500 a shell of itself forever more. Guaranteeing spots in the Indy 500 to the likes of a dentist and Racin' Gardner destroyed the mystique of the Indy 500 and meant that it was no longer about being the best.

        Many men died over the years when attempting to be one of the fastest 33, and Tony George degraded them by guaranteeing rides to scabs in his power grabbing scam. It meant that Indy was no longer about being the fastest 33. This would be akin to the NBA Finals being played by NBDL or WNBA teams. If that happened, the players would not be the rightful linear descendants of Lebron, Kobe, Shaq, Jordan, Bird, Magic, and Russell. The link would be forever broken. Tony George thought that the fans were too stupid to know the difference between Al Unser Jr. and Racin' Gardner.......or between Michael Andretti and the racing dentist. He felt that anyone who drove the Indy 500 would be an instant hero even if they were some scab off the street. Well that was pure lunacy and the fans rejected it by the millions. It's why Buddy Lazier will never be considered a real Indy 500 champ.

        So he immediately killed the driver aspect of it when he kicked out the real racers. The other half of the equation is the machines themselves. Indy would never have become Indy if it had simply been spec cars from 1911 onward. That would have been a snoozefest and it would have never attracted the attention of world engineers who tried to outdo each other on the world's biggest stage. The innovation of the automobile could be traced through decade upon decade of progress at Indy. By the 90's, CART had beautiful state of the art equipment that were rivaled only by Formula 1. Then the IRL came along in 1996 with its obsolete old CART cars that it used for a year, followed by the crappy Oldsmobile spec cars in 1997 that were dangerous pieces of junk. They were an insult to the decades upon decades of improving gorgeous equipment that was seen at Indy. Fans don't want to see a bunch of uniform bland machines. They want differences and excitement. Did you see a line of spec cars behind Al Unser Jr. and Scott Goodyear in the 92 500? No, because their machines and superior driving ability allowed them to dust everyone else. Thus, it's remembered as one of the most exciting races ever.

        In 95, a second year team won the Indy 500 and CART championship. You had record sponsorship, track attendance, ratings, attention, and a good mix of oval/street course racing. Nothing needed fixing. Where we are today is Penske dominating just like he used to. All it cost was hundreds of millions of dollars, millions of fans, sponsorship, relevance, and the decline of the Indy 500. All so TG could have control and ultimately get canned by his sisters. Not worth it...

        The racing today is really good. There are some very good teams and quite a few great drivers. But even today the people who are carrying the series all came from CART. Nothing in Tony George's vision panned out. Everything failed and the people he wanted gone are the only ones providing any entertainment today. I really don't think he ever really wanted them gone to begin with though. He just wanted control.
        Last edited by Sollozzo; 06-12-2015, 05:53 PM.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: 2015 Indycar Thread

          Nice run in Toronto today for Indycar. Nice finish by CFH Racing. The gray skies brought fears of another Indycar embarrassment in the rain, but between Indycar getting a bit smarter (starting single file), the track drying and more rain holding off, and more experience for teams and drivers it turned into a great race. And a clean race.

          About the only complaint I have is TV coverage seemed to always be away at commercial when important strategic things played out. But that's slightly negated thanks to the split screen during commercials. It happened enough that I think they need to rethink their policy about cutting or not cutting away from the commercial breaks.

          Nice seeing Hinch there in person.

          I understood why finding a date for this year's Toronto race was tough but I didn't understand what any of that had to do with taking away the double-header from Toronto. I still think the double headers are a good idea because it's more airtime for sponsors. And theoretically, more press. And it fattens the Indycar schedule, even if a bit artificially if you want to think about it that way. But it's still 2 points paying races over a couple of days.
          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


          • #80
            Re: 2015 Indycar Thread

            Nice to see Rahal finally get some payoff in this season that has seen him drive the wheels off the car just to be "first in class".

            Initially the 'return' to pack racing had me thinking maybe on a wide track, and at 500 miles, it wouldn't be quite so dangerous. But after 130+ laps of green flag racing and nobody able to get separation, and with all (or the majority of) the wrecks that did happen ultimately being the result of thin margins of error in 3 and 4 wide racing, I can see why the drivers were complaining. And referencing Vegas.
            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


            • #81
              Re: 2015 Indycar Thread

              After reading a lot of the comments and debate following this race and "the return of pack racing" I have a bit of a theory. There seems to be several people claiming this is what Indycar needs to generate attention and attendance. They thought it was a great, exciting race. Then there are others that thought it was a "death race".

              For the first argument, if it's true this is what Indycar needs then why didn't the IRL vision end up with packed stands and primetime style Nielsen ratings? When Wheldon was killed, it's not like the stands were jam packed. Even after a lot of promotion.

              Here's what I think... Last night was a close, exciting race. It was made moreso because we haven't seen racing like that for a while. But, if every oval race is like that... or almost every oval race, then it loses it's luster and starts to feel manufactured. While true, you cannot predict the winner (and most think that is good for racing), it's also true the winner will just be the guy that managed to make the last pass and/or throw the last block. It won't necessarily be the best driver or best car or even best team. So the rules package dumbs down the racing to the point that the best drivers and teams are held back and the 2nd tier teams can float upward.
              If what I read is true, Pippa Mann finished on the lead lap. With a race that went 130 + laps caution free, Mann does not stay on the lead lap unless the best drivers and cars have been dumbed down.

              So, dangerous pack racing at EVERY oval is not the answer. It just starts to feel manufactured. And then it's acknowledged that it's extra dangerous because it purposefully doesn't separate the men from the boys. Instead, it allows the 'boys' to race right there with the 'men' just waiting on a mechanical failure or driving error that then is magnified many times over due to the closeness of so many cars. And inexperience racing right there with experience. And lastly, when it is pack racing and nobody can separate then it creates another issue: Aggressiveness. You have to be extra aggressive to stay with the lead group. You have to be uber aggressive to make a pass and make it stick... for a lap. And at the end of the race, unless you are lucky enough to be in the front 3-4 cars, then you're going to have to get hyper aggressive to try and and get there for that last lap shootout. And with everyone able to driver similar speeds and the tow, the car you're passing doesn't feel inclined to just let you go. So they become hyper aggressive in fighting back. So even if you are a little faster, you can't get back to your freer line while Parnelli is hanging tough beside you. And then one of you bobbles....

              I don't think people go to the races to see people get injured and killed. They go to see them walk away unscathed if they see an accident at all. Sitting on the edge of your seat every oval race watching manufactured racing and realizing someone could easily die because of the resulting tiny margin of error of pack racing race after race is something that I think weighs on fans.
              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


              • #82
                Re: 2015 Indycar Thread

                I understand the added risk with the pack racing but I did think that was the most entertaining race we've seen in awhile.
                "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                -Lance Stephenson

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: 2015 Indycar Thread

                  Pack racing was never meant for open wheel machines, which is why IndyCar has basically been operating as an airline over the last 20 years. With this type of racing, you are inevitably going to have cars take off like flying jets. Of course, these cars also have the tendency to take off in the air even when not making contact with another car.

                  Pack racing is for the NASCRAP herd mentality type of fan. Nothing wrong with that, but it has a time and place in NASCRAP. Stock cars are obviously inherently safer for that type of racing because the design of the machine makes it much less likely that they will fly up in into the air. Indy Cars used to be about innovation and seeing the cream rise to the top. Watching the best of the best race close to one another is exciting, but seeing a whole pack in unison is boring.

                  Dangerous oval pack racing already cost us Dan Wheldon.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: 2015 Indycar Thread

                    Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                    I understand the added risk with the pack racing but I did think that was the most entertaining race we've seen in awhile.
                    I agree it was entertaining. But I think it was entertaining because it was extraordinary and rare now. But if the rules are just going to make that the norm then it won't be extraordinary and rare and it'll just be obviously manufactured.

                    A tight finish makes you go "WOW!"... because that should be rare when it happens. It should be about the stars aligning... not about the rules dumbing racing down to the point that 2nd and even 3rd tier teams can mix it up with first tier teams everytime they hit a Nascar D shaped oval.

                    Indycars are pretty safe when they wreck by themselves generally. But it's a whole 'nother ball of wax when they interlock wheels in the middle of the pack of a whole field of tightly bunched cars doing 200+ MPH. Any time a car goes airborne it becomes seriously random what will follow.

                    I also think modern era (potential) fans are turned off by racing due to several PR missteps and perceptions. People aren't out looking to see someone die on the track. But casual fans don't realize the differences in high banked D shaped oval cookie cutter oval racing and a flat track like Milwaukee (as far as danger goes). IMHO...

                    And as stated above in this thread... A lot of mystique is gone. Indycar has lost the imagination of fans and children of fans with year after year of spec racing and dumbed down speeds and innovation.
                    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


                    • #85
                      Re: 2015 Indycar Thread




                      Pretty much exactly the way I feel.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: 2015 Indycar Thread

                        Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post



                        Pretty much exactly the way I feel.

                        I don't doubt that Ed Carpenter loves close pack oval racing since that's pretty much the only prayer he has at winning a race.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: 2015 Indycar Thread

                          Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                          I don't doubt that Ed Carpenter loves close pack oval racing since that's pretty much the only prayer he has at winning a race.
                          Texas last year was nothing close to pack racing.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: 2015 Indycar Thread

                            I have to admit, when the idea of racing until Labor Day was proposed I thought it was a good idea. BUT I thought that would be a soft date, not some written in granite, brick wall date. And I saw it more as good to keep there from being 3-4-5 momentum killing weeks between races when the schedule was thin. I didn't think it would mean several consecutive weeks of racing without break, and bad dates for tracks/promoters just to keep everything inside that Labor Day cutoff.

                            I also ASSUMED they'd be able to take advantage of the winter better but it turns out they really haven't done it at all. Not condense the schedule into some sponsor killing tiny window. Now there are tracks who hate their (randomly changing) dates and are threatening to pull the plug (and I can't say I blame them based on attendance). And there are other tracks wanting dates but Indycar can't find a date for them thanks to the hard cutoff of Labor Day. Sheer craziness...

                            I'm not sure what the answer is, but I'm sure they are going to have to widen that window one way or the other.

                            I'm also curious what happened to the double-headers? That, to me, seemed a relatively painless way to get the sponsors more exposure and to give the fans more racing without stretching teams too thin. Detroit was a dual... But Toronto wasn't? I realize they had trouble finding a date for Toronto due to other commitments in Toronto. But once they had a race weekend, what did any of that have to do with not making it a dual (as it's been in the past)?

                            It's amazing to me how Indycar can start the season, and head into Indy, seemingly on an upswing every year, and then by mid-June it all feels like the series is on the verge of folding.

                            I wonder how serious some teams might be about some outlaw races to extend the season in the future? If Indycar doesn't do something, they might paint them into that corner with sponsor demands. Especially if the teams could find some willing tracks to work with them and a TV partner. It could sure be worth the threat even if it is a bluff.

                            I know there is a lot of worry about oval attendance, and it's obviously bad, but I don't think the street races are as strong as they seem. They just don't have that many seats in the first place so 10,000 people looks like a great crowd. Whereas, in a track with 80,000+ seats (oval) it's abysmal looking.
                            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


                            • #89
                              Re: 2015 Indycar Thread

                              Nascar is going to put a car into the stands. It's not a question of if, it's a question of when.
                              Austin Dillon is one lucky young man.
                              All the talk about the catch fence doing it's job is neglecting to take into account a couple of 'what if' scenarios (that are very easily into the realm of possibility).
                              One, what if that engine and transmission go flying the other direction towards the stands instead of away from them? The #3 car compromised the fence so much there was nothing really left to stop an engine, transmission, rear end, driveshaft, wheel, etc from flying right on thru unobstructed if they broke loose and momentum sent them that direction.
                              Two, with the cars all packed up like this in plate racing it's easy to imagine 2 cars getting airborne. If they both head towards the fence and if the first car does the damage the #3 car did tonight, the second car goes right on into the crowd.

                              Let alone, with the damage the #3 car did, any debris from subsequent wrecks no longer has a fence to catch it. So you don't even need a 2nd car getting airborne to cause major damage in the stands. There's no longer anything to catch any flying parts and pieces from even less serious wrecks that might occur behind the car doing the fence damage.

                              Those fences are being asked to contain a lot of weight and momentum when a Nascar goes hurtling towards it.
                              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


                              • #90
                                Re: 2015 Indycar Thread

                                Bourdais was amazing the 2nd half of the race in Milwaukee.

                                Why Hawksworth was out there after the first stint I'll never know.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X