NASCAR - what am I missing?
Discussion
I've tried watching NASCAR a few times recently, including today, as I reckon that there must be something to it, for so many people to enjoy it.
At the moment, I can't see it - there are just a lot of cars (albeit V8s) driving around an oval.
What nuances am I missing, and what do I need to know, to help me appreciate it? Where's the interest, the excitement, the buzz?
At the moment, I can't see it - there are just a lot of cars (albeit V8s) driving around an oval.
What nuances am I missing, and what do I need to know, to help me appreciate it? Where's the interest, the excitement, the buzz?
RacerMDR said:
nope - its officially s
t. I love motorracing - and iv'e really tried.....just don't get it.
I've tried too. Does very little for me on TV. Seeing it in the flesh might be a different matter I'll wager - 20 odd V8s' nose to tail at 200mph rushing past every minute or so; does'nt sound bad t. I love motorracing - and iv'e really tried.....just don't get it.
John D. said:
RacerMDR said:
nope - its officially st. I love motorracing - and iv'e really tried.....just don't get it.
I've tried too. Does very little for me on TV. Seeing it in the flesh might be a different matter I'll wager - 20 odd V8s' nose to tail at 200mph rushing past every minute or so; does'nt sound bad t. I love motorracing - and iv'e really tried.....just don't get it.The cars sounded great, but the racing was all a bit bland. But the crowd was the scary bit - rednecks were out in force and there was a shedload of beer being drunk, and abuse hurled at the drivers they didn't like. They were rather, shall we say, parochial towards their chosen driver
John D. said:
RacerMDR said:
nope - its officially st. I love motorracing - and iv'e really tried.....just don't get it.
I've tried too. Does very little for me on TV. Seeing it in the flesh might be a different matter I'll wager - 20 odd V8s' nose to tail at 200mph rushing past every minute or so; does'nt sound bad t. I love motorracing - and iv'e really tried.....just don't get it.I'd suggest that, in 5 laps of the Southern 500, there was more overtaking than there was in all 66 laps of the Spanish GP. Then we have the fact that NASCAR drivers are accessible to the fans, unlike the pampered pooches of F1.
It's fashionable to some to look down on NASCAR as simplistic but, in the prime of his career, Montoya went from being a winner in F1 to being an also-ran in NASCAR.
Give it a bit more time and you might enjoy it more. I watched the f1 grand prix at barcelona the day and apart from the incident on the first lap it was pretty dull (and Im a massive fan of f1).
You might enjoy different tracks more, I prefer the super speedways like Talladega and Daytona, also the road courses like Watkins Glen and Infineon raceway are good im my opinion compared to short tracks like Bristol and Martinsville.
Just keep watching it and you might just start to enjoy it.
You might enjoy different tracks more, I prefer the super speedways like Talladega and Daytona, also the road courses like Watkins Glen and Infineon raceway are good im my opinion compared to short tracks like Bristol and Martinsville.
Just keep watching it and you might just start to enjoy it.
I've been watching highlights of most of the races for the last couple of years, and while highlights aren't perfect, it's not bad racing once you're into it.
What it is, is a team sport. What it's not, is a test of ulimate car control and racecraft.
Some very very talented open-wheel drivers who are well used to ovals have come in to Nascar and are taking years to get up to speed. JP Montoya, Sam Hornish and Dario Franchitti are all former CART champions and the transition hasn't been swift and sure for any of them.
The reason they're not winning from the outset is that Nascar is predominantly reliant on car setup. Not simply finding a balance for the car in qualifying and running that, but in understanding how the track changes as it rubbers in, as the race wears on and the ambient and track temperature changes, as a high line emerges that might be quicker than the low line earlier in the race, etc etc. The behaviour of the car changes subtly and the driver who wins is usually the one who has the setup right throughout the race.
The driver has to understand what the car's doing and relate that to the crew chief throughout the race, and the crew chief has to make the right judgement calls on what changes to adopt at pitstops. It's all about the setup of the car; a good Nascar driver has excellent car control but also outstanding technical feedback and a feel for reading / predicting track conditions.
So the whole thing is a race team's sport, based on depth of knowledge and experience both in the car and on the pit wall.
As you watch the racing it becomes clear who has a handle on their car and who doesn't.
The remarkable thing about Nascar is that in the main, the racing is quite subtle and free from contact. Which is surprising mainly because of the average Nascar fan. The fans and the track action seem totally incompatible...
What it is, is a team sport. What it's not, is a test of ulimate car control and racecraft.
Some very very talented open-wheel drivers who are well used to ovals have come in to Nascar and are taking years to get up to speed. JP Montoya, Sam Hornish and Dario Franchitti are all former CART champions and the transition hasn't been swift and sure for any of them.
The reason they're not winning from the outset is that Nascar is predominantly reliant on car setup. Not simply finding a balance for the car in qualifying and running that, but in understanding how the track changes as it rubbers in, as the race wears on and the ambient and track temperature changes, as a high line emerges that might be quicker than the low line earlier in the race, etc etc. The behaviour of the car changes subtly and the driver who wins is usually the one who has the setup right throughout the race.
The driver has to understand what the car's doing and relate that to the crew chief throughout the race, and the crew chief has to make the right judgement calls on what changes to adopt at pitstops. It's all about the setup of the car; a good Nascar driver has excellent car control but also outstanding technical feedback and a feel for reading / predicting track conditions.
So the whole thing is a race team's sport, based on depth of knowledge and experience both in the car and on the pit wall.
As you watch the racing it becomes clear who has a handle on their car and who doesn't.
The remarkable thing about Nascar is that in the main, the racing is quite subtle and free from contact. Which is surprising mainly because of the average Nascar fan. The fans and the track action seem totally incompatible...
The entertainment of the race is usually the last ten or so laps of a race. I recommend waiting 'til then to start watching. Also, the interesting engineering and tech that is going on underneath seems to not be talked about much, just mentioned casually in the major channels of distribution. Racecar Engineering and Racetech run tech articles every once in a while that might inflame your imagination. Also, maybe catch a road-race. They mix things up and you realize many drivers are better only on ovals, so there are new faces as teams will bring in road-track specialists.
Other than that, it will feel shallow because that's how it's designed: silhouette cars, yellow flags, a restricted tech competition that is forced to focus on minutiae, and a dominating draft. And as far as the driving, there's less to stimulate the imagination as far as different corner types, braking points, weight transfer, and acceleration, so the drivers' scope for decision making is limited by the very nature of the tracks, and therefore devaluing the meaningfulness of passes.
Other than that, it will feel shallow because that's how it's designed: silhouette cars, yellow flags, a restricted tech competition that is forced to focus on minutiae, and a dominating draft. And as far as the driving, there's less to stimulate the imagination as far as different corner types, braking points, weight transfer, and acceleration, so the drivers' scope for decision making is limited by the very nature of the tracks, and therefore devaluing the meaningfulness of passes.
I've tried watching Nascar and sometimes the races can be quite frenetic and entertaining but I find more often than not, it's very processional.
I preferred Nascar about a decade ago, when the cars looked like real cars, before the introduction of the current common-body 'Car of Tomorrow' regs, effectively turning Nascar into a one-make series in which the cars (manufacturers) are differentiated by decals. Seems to have taken the 'stock' aspect of stock car racing a bit too far.
And whatever happened to Cole Trickle?
I preferred Nascar about a decade ago, when the cars looked like real cars, before the introduction of the current common-body 'Car of Tomorrow' regs, effectively turning Nascar into a one-make series in which the cars (manufacturers) are differentiated by decals. Seems to have taken the 'stock' aspect of stock car racing a bit too far.
And whatever happened to Cole Trickle?
Ive never got it. I thought it was dull, boring and one dimensional.
Then the other Sunday I caught the start of the Talladega race and thought Id watch it all the way through....and by God I loved it. Watch from ths start and you can pick up the feel of the race, you basically get the rhythm of the race and the nuances and suddenly it starts to make a lot more sense.
Then you also watch how they drive, how the treat incidents and the car control when "licks", tags and outright incidents occur and you suddenly realise that these guys can seriously *drive*.
Gotta say I love it at the moment.
Then the other Sunday I caught the start of the Talladega race and thought Id watch it all the way through....and by God I loved it. Watch from ths start and you can pick up the feel of the race, you basically get the rhythm of the race and the nuances and suddenly it starts to make a lot more sense.
Then you also watch how they drive, how the treat incidents and the car control when "licks", tags and outright incidents occur and you suddenly realise that these guys can seriously *drive*.
Gotta say I love it at the moment.
DJC said:
Ive never got it. I thought it was dull, boring and one dimensional.
Then the other Sunday I caught the start of the Talladega race and thought Id watch it all the way through....and by God I loved it. Watch from ths start and you can pick up the feel of the race, you basically get the rhythm of the race and the nuances and suddenly it starts to make a lot more sense.
Then you also watch how they drive, how the treat incidents and the car control when "licks", tags and outright incidents occur and you suddenly realise that these guys can seriously *drive*.
Gotta say I love it at the moment.
Restrictor plate races are an impressive spectacle and also can be very interesting, not least cos of the massive draft and the fact that a leader can get shuffled to 17th place or someone in 17th can reach the front in the blink of an eye depending on picking the right line or getting help from following cars. Bump-drafting definitely adds something. The strategy is easier to see and can have a massive effect.Then the other Sunday I caught the start of the Talladega race and thought Id watch it all the way through....and by God I loved it. Watch from ths start and you can pick up the feel of the race, you basically get the rhythm of the race and the nuances and suddenly it starts to make a lot more sense.
Then you also watch how they drive, how the treat incidents and the car control when "licks", tags and outright incidents occur and you suddenly realise that these guys can seriously *drive*.
Gotta say I love it at the moment.
Short track stuff, I tend to surf the internet with it on in the background and look up when something exciting happens...
I went to watch it in Atlanta a couple of years ago.
Have to say I did quite enjoy the day out, but I wasn't interested in the racing.
The one thing I didn't really understand was the abuse to drivers that weren't in their team.
It wasn't like any other racing I've seen, most other forms of motorsport there is respect for a well driven race. I didn't see any of that there.
I don't think I would go again.
Have to say I did quite enjoy the day out, but I wasn't interested in the racing.
The one thing I didn't really understand was the abuse to drivers that weren't in their team.
It wasn't like any other racing I've seen, most other forms of motorsport there is respect for a well driven race. I didn't see any of that there.
I don't think I would go again.
FNG said:
What it is, is a team sport. What it's not, is a test of ulimate car control and racecraft.
I disagree with that entirely......FNG said:
The reason they're not winning from the outset is that Nascar is predominantly reliant on car setup. Not simply finding a balance for the car in qualifying and running that, but in understanding how the track changes as it rubbers in, as the race wears on and the ambient and track temperature changes, as a high line emerges that might be quicker than the low line earlier in the race, etc etc. The behaviour of the car changes subtly and the driver who wins is usually the one who has the setup right throughout the race.
The driver has to understand what the car's doing and relate that to the crew chief throughout the race, and the crew chief has to make the right judgement calls on what changes to adopt at pitstops. It's all about the setup of the car; a good Nascar driver has excellent car control but also outstanding technical feedback and a feel for reading / predicting track conditions.
As you watch the racing it becomes clear who has a handle on their car and who doesn't.
The remarkable thing about Nascar is that in the main, the racing is quite subtle and free from contact. Which is surprising mainly because of the average Nascar fan. The fans and the track action seem totally incompatible...
......but then you said all that ^^^^, which conradicts your earlier statement quite comprehensively, so that made it alright.The driver has to understand what the car's doing and relate that to the crew chief throughout the race, and the crew chief has to make the right judgement calls on what changes to adopt at pitstops. It's all about the setup of the car; a good Nascar driver has excellent car control but also outstanding technical feedback and a feel for reading / predicting track conditions.
As you watch the racing it becomes clear who has a handle on their car and who doesn't.
The remarkable thing about Nascar is that in the main, the racing is quite subtle and free from contact. Which is surprising mainly because of the average Nascar fan. The fans and the track action seem totally incompatible...
If you could get alongside a NASCAR at full tilt on the oval, you could spin it just by pushing on the rear quarter panel with your hand. Add to that feeling the track, picking which groove to be in, drafting etc and I would say its ALL ABOUT car control and racecraft. Apparently, so would you...
I like it a lot and I also like the levels of regulation, the way parity is achieved and the way regulations are implemented. Its largely done in a pretty common sense way asa far as I can tell from watching the coverage and NASCAR Now. Also, it offers great value for the fans because there are SO MANY races in a season. Its a formula that really works I think. I hope to get more into it over the next couple of seasons.
Edited by 308mate on Monday 11th May 11:14
What I meant, sorry if it's obscure, is that despite the CoT being identical except for the engine, the driver is not the key to winning. It's the team. A driver with outstanding car control but no experience of Nascar racing, changing track conditions etc, will not win. The slightly less able driver (merely outstanding instead of genius), with a better knowledge of the sport and a better team behind the wall, will win.
I'm not talking down the car control or racecraft needed in Nascar, but saying it's different to all other series and until the particular nuances of Nascar racing are learned, the "best" drivers in the world won't be frontrunners.
At the Race of Champions, Jeff Gordon acquitted himself well. He didn't win and reckoned himself to be slightly outclassed by some others. Fair play to him. But he sure can win in Nascar where all those other drivers simply couldn't.
Or maybe it's clearer to say that Nascar racecraft is different to almost any other formula, and needs a lot of driver feedback as part of that. But the fact remains that without a great crew chief to make the right setup and strategy calls, a great driver can't win on his own without considerable luck on his side.
I'm not talking down the car control or racecraft needed in Nascar, but saying it's different to all other series and until the particular nuances of Nascar racing are learned, the "best" drivers in the world won't be frontrunners.
At the Race of Champions, Jeff Gordon acquitted himself well. He didn't win and reckoned himself to be slightly outclassed by some others. Fair play to him. But he sure can win in Nascar where all those other drivers simply couldn't.
Or maybe it's clearer to say that Nascar racecraft is different to almost any other formula, and needs a lot of driver feedback as part of that. But the fact remains that without a great crew chief to make the right setup and strategy calls, a great driver can't win on his own without considerable luck on his side.
Went to the Daytona 500 many moons ago - fantastic spectacle. They really know how to put on a show for the fans. Hire headphones with frequencies to listen in to the pit to car radios, full view of almost all the track. The faster tracks are easier to be blown away by, but I suspect the mid length tracks are the most challenging. I found the fans very welcoming, although we didn't venture into the motorhome infield areas. If you have a seat in front of the pits, yellow stops can be hilarious as jacks are thrown under cars and wheel nuts are flying all over the place.
Definitely worth a visit.
Definitely worth a visit.
Daytona has become one of my "most see" experiences now Ive found Nascar.
I was speaking to my bro last night, he is out in Cali and been to a few races and he has mentioned watching most of the races. Darlington was on and I was saying how Id got into it after Talladega and his reaction surprised me..."Oh the Superspeedway restrictor stuff, not *real* Nascar like Bristol and Darlington", I thought the Superspeedway stuff *was* the real Nascar, it seems, that the shorter trickier oval stuff is considered the heartland of the sport. Having watched Darlington and the tricky nature of the track, the shifting line and the trouble you encounter running 2 deep into some of the turns I can appreciate that.
I was speaking to my bro last night, he is out in Cali and been to a few races and he has mentioned watching most of the races. Darlington was on and I was saying how Id got into it after Talladega and his reaction surprised me..."Oh the Superspeedway restrictor stuff, not *real* Nascar like Bristol and Darlington", I thought the Superspeedway stuff *was* the real Nascar, it seems, that the shorter trickier oval stuff is considered the heartland of the sport. Having watched Darlington and the tricky nature of the track, the shifting line and the trouble you encounter running 2 deep into some of the turns I can appreciate that.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff