 | |
Great Derrick Walker Quotes!
Indy Car motor racing Discussions About Indy Car motor racing (rec.autos.sport.indy)
 |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#31
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: Great Derrick Walker Quotes! -
12-28-2003
, 03:11 PM
|
On Wed, 24 Dec 2003 09:36:06 -0600, "Pickaxe" <pickaxe (AT) pickaxe (DOT) org wrote: "tjmc" <tjmc.enteract (AT) rcn (DOT) com> wrote: Question. How was the original idea of running three or four non-conflicting oval races supposed to destroy CART? The original idea of what the IRL was going to do differs from day to day, so how can anyone ever conclusively answer the question? But I think this original IRL idea gets right down to the crux of the whole matter. Had CART not reacted like a bunch of schoolyard bullies it's hard to see how Tony would be running more than three of four races per year. |
And just at how few ovals CART ran recently, and even more, how few
OWRS plans to run (replacing them with more of those idiotic street
circuits).
If he had not stepped in major league open-wheel racing might have
disappeared completely, with the CHUMPS cheering all the way.
Quote:
|
Once CART threw down the gauntlet of the US500, Tony was forced to assemble a separate season with a separate series. After that, all bets were off as he was forced to cherry pick the available drivers (many foreign born), get in tight with manufacturers and pursue several CART-like strategies. As powerful as he was, even he couldn't immediately change a business model twenty years in the making. |
But the CHUMPS miss this point. He wanted an adjunct series of ovals
to guarantee he had a field of oval cars for his oval event, and
welcomed CART to come along, but instead they shuffled their schedule
(after they had already said they couldn't) to conflict with his and
changed their rules for the cars for the next season (1996, when they
had already previously stated was impossible because of the short lead
times).
TG had warned CART for THREE years that he would start his own series
unless certain changes were made (slow the cars down, quit dropping
ovals, control costs, and open the doors for American drivers) and
they ignored him - as it turned out, to their own peril - and then
came out swinging like drunken sailors when he made good on his
promise.
But, according to CHUMPS, everything is TG's fault.
Yeah, riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiight!
#32
| ||||
| ||||
|
|
"tjmc" <tjmc.enteract (AT) rcn (DOT) com> wrote in message news:jhcjuvs1ptl6tkqj1cabbn578i14d8cmif (AT) 4ax (DOT) com... But I think this original IRL idea gets right down to the crux of the whole matter. Had CART not reacted like a bunch of schoolyard bullies it's hard to see how Tony would be running more than three of four races per year. So how were the CART teams supposed to make it to those 3 or 4 races? |
The same way they made it to all their others.
How did CART get its teams to all those overseas races it decided to
have that cost far more than four or five US oval events would have?
Quote:
|
Did Tony ask their sponsors if they would be willing to foot the bill for an additional 3 or 4 races? |
Did CART ask the sponsors when they expanded their series from 16 to
20 races?
Did CART ask their sponsors when they ignored TG, telling those
sponsors that TG had warned them they would lose the Indy 500 if they
didn't pay attention to him?
Quote:
|
The money they got from their sponsors to participate at Indy (assuming the 25 - 8 rule never came into being) would have been funneled right back into the month of May. |
So sayeth you.
Quote:
|
Did the 3 or 4 extra races cater towards CART's demographic? |
Did those CART sponsors want to be at the Indy 500?
Since they were wiiling to pony up half a CART team's budget to go to
Indy each year, wouldn't you think they thought it catered to the same
demographic?
#33
| |||||
| |||||
|
|
"tjmc" <tjmc.enteract (AT) rcn (DOT) com> wrote in message news:efgjuvsmut0j778qmph17r5rpcuqu8u0cn (AT) 4ax (DOT) com... On Wed, 24 Dec 2003 10:31:11 -0600, "Pickaxe" <pickaxe (AT) pickaxe (DOT) org wrote: So how were the CART teams supposed to make it to those 3 or 4 races? Did Tony ask their sponsors if they would be willing to foot the bill for an additional 3 or 4 races? The money they got from their sponsors to participate at Indy (assuming the 25 - 8 rule never came into being) would have been funneled right back into the month of May. Pretty easy, really First lets remember it was 1996, CART having come off a pretty successful 1995 season. Plenty of sponsors and loads of money in the economy. More importantly, the racing was still world class and TV was abundant. Now, the owner of the Indianapolis 500 (the most important event of the year) comes to you and requests an extra four races. That means an extra four races with your sponsor's livery, extra exposure and extra purses all fitting easily within your already pre-announced schedule. Seems like a no-brainer to me. Not so sure about that - they (the teams) would either have had raise a load more money from their sponsors |
You're taking out of the very ignorant side of your arse again, Iain.
No, they would not have had to raise "a load more money." After all,
they didn't seem to have to when CART quickly expanded their schedule
from 16 races to 20 races when they were trying to cover any IRL race
date they could.
Quote:
|
or CART would have had to drop existing races from the schedule |
No, they wouldn't, my ever increasingly dense limey osmium lump.
They EXPANDED the series the year after, and again the year after
that.
Quote:
|
(which was probably not feasible with existing contracts etc) |
As if you would possibly KNOW!
You repeatedly demonstrate your complete lack of knowledge and
understanding of the subject matter under discussion.
Either learn a bit about what is being talked about, or just shut up.
Quote:
|
The extra money to increase a season from say 16 to 20 races isn't going to be another 25% on top of the existing budgets but it would still have been a lot of cash to ask ALL the sponsors for. Inevitably some would have just paid up, others, maybe not. |
Then why, EXACTLY, Mr. Know-It-All, did CART expand its schedule from
16 to 20 races in the years after the "split"?
See how incredibly STUPID you look?
Quote:
|
Besides which there are only so many racing weekends in the year - CART used to schedule away from F1 most weekends - occasionally we'd get both but more often than not we wouldn't. Taking the schedule up by another 4 events would have made it very crowded I think. |
Then why did CART ******EXPAND**** and ******INCREASE****** its
schedule from 16 to 20 events, allon its own, and all after the IRL
was formed, you silly, dim-witted wanker?
#34
| |||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
|
|
Not so sure about that - they (the teams) would either have had raise a load more money from their sponsors or CART would have had to drop existing races from the schedule (which was probably not feasible with existing contracts etc) Look, Iain, Tony wasn't asking, he was telling. Telling CART it needed to get back to (or at least not abandon) Indy car's traditional oval heritage. I don't know exactly what was being said at the time |
Then you should shut the hell up instead of talking like you did know
what was going on.
Quote:
|
I know (from what Ken Plotkin has said here) that there were some "rumblings" about less focus on Ovals |
Why do you feel compelled to ADVERTISE you complete and utter
stupidity?
You don't know the sugject matter, but you keep telling us all how
everything works regarding it.
You are worse sometimes than one of the CHUMPS.
Quote:
|
Indy would have been safe in all of it. |
Really? If TG had gone right with CART, and one day, due to some of
those owners wanting to keep more of their sponsors money in their own
pocket rather than spending it in May, had convinced the majority of
the owners to boycott the Indy 500 unless the "Month of May" was cut
short, what could TG done?
Instead of having to ever answer that question, he formed the IRL so
he could control that situation.
Quote:
|
It meant too much to the drivers, teams, sponsors AND Team Owners (who were basically the CART board!) to abandon it. |
Not according to you in many of your other posts. You have all of them
leaving any day for NASCAR and leaving TG in the lurch.
Make up your friggin' mind.
You are worse than a woman. You prattle on endlessly about things you
know nothing about, only then to change your mind and say the opposite
was what you intended to say all along.
Quote:
|
As you know I think what TG did had very little to do with what you are suggesting |
Be we have determined, and you have freely demonstrated, that you
don't know anything at all about the subject, so how on Earth would
you know what and who had to do with it?
Quote:
|
it was about power, control, ego and dollars. |
No SH*T! what was your first clue, moron?
The part you are leaving out is that it was about power, control, ego,
and dollars from CART's standpoint, too. They wanted all of that, and
to control the Indy 500, too.
TG wanted the same, and he won.
Doesn't matter that CART loterally capitulated dues to thsie own
stupidity and mismangement.
TG still won.
They wanted power, control, and dollars, He wanted power, control, and
the same dollars.
He has them all now. CART doesn't.
Do you need me to draw you a friggin' picture or diagram?
Quote:
|
He now appears to have the things he wanted |
Yep. The very same things they wanted.
Quote:
|
he just has to make it pay and that is his current problem |
We should all have such problems!
I doubt TG is nearly as worried as you are. After all, he is already
worth millions and millions and millions and has millions and millions
and millions fo dollars rolling in each and every year.
How about you?
Quote:
|
somebody probably told him "be careful what you wish for" in 95/96 - he obviously thought he knew better. In about 2-3 years from now we'll know if he was right. |
Well, we all know now CART certainly wasn't right, now don't we?
But you just love to skate right past that point.
Quote:
|
The IRL will either be thriving or it'll be bust IMHO. |
You couldn't possibly have a "humble" opinion.
Quote:
|
At the same time it was a clarion call to the organization that it needed to do something to stem the tide regarding the overwhelming numbers of foreign (mostly Brazilian) tobacco-pimp drivers entering the series. They were being hired because they were the fastest guys around. We had this discussion some months ago - I don't doubt that non American drivers cleaning up is bad for any form of racing in the states - because American's don't generally like to watch stuff they don't win at. The problem for the teams was of course that in order to compete and deliver coverage to their sponsors they had to have the best drivers and most of those didn't carry US passports. Catch 22 Goals that would help Indy and Indy car racing in the long run. I'm sure what Tony was looking to do was not allow CART to freeze out guys like Stan Fox or Rich Vogler, even the occasional Tony Stewart, Jeff Gordon or Sam Hornish. ......which was all very laudable but, as he has latterly found, somewhat impractical - hence why the policy (if there ever really was one) appears to have been abandoned like a cheap suit. |
Once again, you snap off with your stupidity rather than doa tiny bit
of homework.
When was it abandoned?
Where did Sam Hornish come from - Brazil?
Ed Carpenter - where did he come from? Didn;t he drive sprints and
midgets?
Sarah Fisher road raced where, exactly, in South America?
The door is freely open for American drivers in the IRL, as teams can
affrod to actually pay drivers, unlike the current situation in CART
where they have to take only drivers that have money (and yes,
Virginia, Ryan Hunter-Reay was a ride buyer, despite his being an
American), and the vastmahority of ride buyers out there are foreign.
Quote:
|
The extra money to increase a season from say 16 to 20 races isn't going to be another 25% on top of the existing budgets but it would still have been a lot of cash to ask ALL the sponsors for. Geeze, Iain, sponsors sponsor cars for exposure. It's hard to see how adding a few more races would be detrimental. Sponsors have limits and budgets (as was pointed out here some weeks ago). The cost of running any form of Open wheel is very high - much higher than Nascar. |
One more time you look incredibly dumb.
It costs FAR, FAR more to run NASCAR now than either CART or the IRL,
Iain.
Parading around your ignorance is not going to win any debates. You
only look more and more foolish.
Quote:
|
Inevitably some would have just paid up, others, maybe not. Besides which there are only so many racing weekends in the year - Sixteen races was hardly ever a full schedule. For any form of Open wheel it is - I can't think of pretty much any series that runs too much more than that. |
Then why did CART expand from 16 to 20?
Why did it have 19 scheduled to run in 2003 when it was going broke?
Quote:
|
CART used to schedule away from F1 most weekends - occasionally we'd get both but more often than not we wouldn't. Taking the schedule up by another 4 events would have made it very crowded I think. Crowded shmowded. Wanna see crowded look at NASCAR. ...who's schedule is insane and about which there has been much grumbling, no? Besides which, the lower levels of technology in Nascar and lower costs perhaps allow this more that would be possible in an F1/CART/IRL environment. |
Man, you are SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO stupid.
Do some homework on NASCAR before you start prattling about it.
It is flagrantly obvious you know NOTHING about it, either.
Quote:
|
It's entirely that sort of thinking by the few rich-boy owners why CART never established itself amongst more then a few open wheel enthusiasts. The same guys that gave you 8-10 years of great racing from the mid 80's to the mid 90's?? The same people that are putting the effort into running IRL teams now? Now there's gratitude for ya - suggest you sue 'em if you are unhappy with what the are serving up! |
But they are not the ones in control now, you stubbornly dim-witted
wanker.
#35
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
"tjmc" <tjmc.enteract (AT) rcn (DOT) com> wrote in message news:m4vmuvgkoo2ec4rufd6s9pa7j7m6074pp0 (AT) 4ax (DOT) com... On Thu, 25 Dec 2003 18:34:20 -0000, "Iain Miller" <donot (AT) spam (DOT) me> wrote: Ovals but, at the end of the day, Indy would have been safe in all of it. It meant too much to the drivers, teams, sponsors AND Team Owners (who were basically the CART board!) to abandon it. How on God's green earth can you say that when that's precisely what they did in 1996? Thata be the year of 25/8 then..... Did they have any choice? How on "Gods green earth" could you ever expect all the CART teams to turn up and spend the whole month of May and the associated Millions of $$ in trying to qualify for only eight slots on the grid between them? How would the non qualifiers have ever got their sponsors to wear that one? |
They didn't have to, you moron.
Each of those CART teams already had 1995-spec cars, you twit. These
cars were essentially useless to them as CART had changed their rules
and all of those CART teams had to have new 1996 cars to compete in
CART in 1996.
25/8 referred to the top 25 teams in IRL points would have guaranteed
starting spots at the Indy 500. CART was not racing in January of
1996. Any CART team could have better amortized their 1995 cars by
taking them to Orlando's IRL race in 1996 and having all CART teams
blow off the weak 1996 IRL tams and filling the field, and hence the
finishing order. This alone would have palced them in the necessary
area of points without even going to the Phoenix IRL race, since
literally none f the IRL teams would have garnered points at Orlando.
But, if they had chosen to go to Phoenix (where they already had data
and set-ups from the previous year's CART race there for their 1995
CART/1996 IRL cars) they would have again dominated, and at a next to
nothing, relatively, cost. Then they would have once again blown the
weak and unstable IRL teams into the weeds, locking up the top 25
slots in points and essentially destroying TG's IRL in only two race
outings with equipmetn they would be using as show cars, anyway.
So you can see how CART teams could have easily, and cheaply, OWNED
those 25 spots and instead left the no-name, no-budget IRL teams out
in the cold trying for those 8 spots.
Learn a little first, Iain, then post.
Quote:
|
25/8 was a crude attempt to drive a wedge between the CART teams fairly early one. |
And could have just as easily been the axe could have brought down on
the IRL's neck.
Quote:
|
CART could be criticised for scheduling Michigan head to head with Indy - that was probably a bit silly in hindsight although from what I've read they took the likes of Valvoline to MIS with them. |
It was beyond silly, stupid, moronic, and self-destructive. They would
have been better served running those two initial IRL events, and then
mopping up Indy, which, BTW, Mr. Wizard, would have been far cheaper
for them than running the US-500.
Oh, and for your information - Yes, Indy lost Valvoline, but Pennzoil
(the No.1 seller of oil in the USA- jumped right in and filled their
shoes quite adequately, and took away their CART tem sponsorship and
gave it to an IRL team, to boot - all while Derrick Walker still had
to run some IRL events in Valvoline livery because his sponsors wanted
him to.
Quote:
|
Regardless, CART and the teams at the time stuck together and stayed away which, at the time would probably have looked like the only viable course of action for them all together. |
No, my little pin-headed wanker. We have already proven there was a
much better strategy they could have employed - one that would have
wiped out the IRL even before it got really started - but they instead
chose the idiot's way out.
And look at where they are now.
Quote:
|
I suppose they could have all gone and taken the first 26 (or however many there were of them) theoretical spots on the grid but there was no way that TG would have climbed down & let them all race. |
What choice would he have had?
(now are you going to make some goofy, irrelevant stuff up here or at
least think a bit before you hit the send key and thinkthis through?)
Quote:
|
Even if there was believed to be a possibility that he would/could be made to the commercial risks attached the whim of one man were far too great to try it. |
How would you know?
Look at what they did and the commercial DISASTER the US500 turned out
to be.
Quote:
|
Faced with the commercial position I can't see they had any option but to stay away. |
But we have proven, beyond the shadow of any possible or reasonable
doubt, that you are stupid beyond all imagination.
Maybe even more stupid than they were.
Just look at where they are now, and I haven't seen any "Iain
Championship Series" anywhere yet.
Quote:
|
At the time 90+% of the "Name" drivers in Open wheel were in CART and so the race in 96 & for a couple of years after that was basically a farce - the best drivers were simply not there and everybody knew it. Is it not one of Indy's basic traditions/mantras that its a race for the best 33 entrants? It could be agued that anybody who paid for tickets for Indy for those years got served up with a very sub-standard event. |
Then why did CART lose the war?
Quote:
|
As you know I think what TG did had very little to do with what you are suggesting - it was about power, control, ego and dollars. He now appears to have the things he wanted - he just has to make it pay and that is his current problem - somebody probably told him "be careful what you wish for" in 95/96 - he obviously thought he knew better. In about 2-3 years from now we'll know if he was right. The IRL will either be thriving or it'll be bust IMHO. For the 200th time, Tony owns and operates IMS. At the end of the day that's the company. If one or even several "departments" are not profit centers their losses are simply balanced against total income which by any objective observance is substantial. If the sums balance then of course that's true. The IRL could lose a Billion$ a year and it doesn't matter as long as IMS Corp makes A Billion & 1 $. That said I suspect that actually IMS corp was maybe doing a bit better when it had its 500/BY 400 revenues and wasn't hemoraghing money on the IRL. |
But we have many times over proven your conjecture to be ludicrous to
the extreme.
As someone once said, and it fits you Iain: "You don't know jack."
Quote:
|
We also don't KNOW that IMS corp is actually making money because its private. |
Yes, we do know. If they didn't make money they would be out of
business, you idiot.
Quote:
|
There are the obvious rumours of unrest in the family but who knows? |
You certainly don't, and your powers of deduction are slightly less
than those of a sea slug.
Quote:
|
The 500 & the BY400 obviously make money, F1 I'm not so sure about |
Yes, they do. So does the F-1 race. So does the golf course. So does
the Speedway Motel. So does Clabber Girl.
Quote:
|
(isn't the sanction $25M a year now?). |
No, and it has never been anywhere close to that for IMS.
Think 7 figures.
Quote:
|
The question is whether losses on the IRL oughtweigh these - and nobody is telling. |
But you are once again making the Grand-Daddy of all idiotic
assumptions in suggesting that the IRL is sustaining losses.
Prove it.
Quote:
|
Also bear in mind that a LOT of money has been sunk into Indy as a facility in recent years with the infield circuit, F1 pits etc etc.and it would be reasonable to expect that the administrative costs of running the IRL are not small. |
Oh, PUH-Leeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeze!
You are really grasping at straws now.
How much do you really know about the Speedway?
It is obvious, not very much, if any, at all.
Just more of your STUPID conjecture.
Quote:
|
Two other things. While the IRL may not generate a profit, with its cars fully sponsored and its TV contracts, it's difficult to see how it could be running that deeply in the red. Not so sure about that. |
Why not? You are so VERY sure about everything else.
Quote:
|
WHat we don't/won't ever know is the extent to which IRL corp is having to prop up the series. |
Again, suggesting, without knowing one way or the other, that the IRL
is having to be propped up.
Quote:
|
We've all heard/seen the rumblings about the TV contract & if that goes or becomes something the IRL has to pay for that would obviously be bad. |
First of all, the contract is signed, sealed, notarized, witnessed,
and elivered, and for years into the future.
But here's a hypothetical question for you: How come it is GOOD that
CART, or OWRS, have to pay for its TV time (perhaps and only be able
to get on a cable network) but it would somehow be BAD if the IRL did?
Quote:
|
From ABC's point of view I am sure they are looking at the ratings trends very carefully & if they don't pick up then commercially they may have to act. There may even be clauses in their contracts that allow them to do so for all we know. Obviously ratings affect TV ad revenes too. |
More and more Iain-Speak conjecture without substance or source.
Just his mind rambling along hoping his dreams will somehow come true.
Quote:
|
Similarly the value being derived by signature sponsrs is sliding as the ratings slide. |
But they still all want to be at, and win, the Indy 500.
Something it is apparent you will never understand. That one point
that CART missed is what did more to destroy them than just about
anything else. They didn't recognize or understand it, just as your
feeble mind doesn't, and it killed them.
With you, we should be so lucky.
Quote:
|
Crowds in attendance are nice to have (and obviously mean a lot to the track owners and so affect sanctioning fees) but the live audiences are a fraction of what a decent sized TV audience looks like. |
Don;t tell that t the pro-CART CHUMPS contingent. They have all been
telling us for years that attendance is EVERYTHING!
Quote:
|
The sponsors are there for exposure and advertising |
And image and pride and ego.
Quote:
|
without good TV ratings and with the number of opportunities elsewhere they have to be re-evaluating where to spend their $$ the whole time -(whether its the IRL or any other sport) |
More of Iain's baseless conjecture.
Quote:
|
Secondly, if Tony has any decent accountants, and I suspect he has, what losses are generated are further diminished thru tax strategies. No doubt he takes every $ of tax losses he can. |
The Indianapolis Motor Speedway doesn't pay any taxes, Iain.
Do your homework.
Quote:
|
As long as TG packs 'em in at the 500, hosts the BY400, rents space, keeps the concession stands open and cuts the grass at golf course, the IRL will easily go on as long as he desires. Remember, too, that he's yet to take full advantage of his road course where I easily foresee as many as three or four more races in the near future...including bikes. Bikes would be interesting - if he could get a big bike event that would obviously do them no harm. |
So glad you approve.
Quote:
|
The Infield track is horribly slippery though. |
How the hell would you know?
And even if it were, I am so very sure that Moto GP, World Superbike,
or AMA Superbike teams just NEVER have to race on a slippery circuit,
rigth?
Man, you are the King of ALL idiots!
Quote:
|
As for the others, Indy is such a huge complex that it must be phenominally expensive to open up & run for a weekends racing. |
You nimrod - IMS is open every day, year round.
Quote:
|
As such unless they can find events that will draw good crowds & TV there probably isn't much to be gained from running numbers of other events unless they can get the attendance & TV coverage. |
I'll bet TG and his family are REALLY glad you are not running IMS,
Iain.
Quote:
|
As for the IRL - he might well find he has to keep funding it. |
Who says he is, other than you and some of the posters here?
Quote:
|
If CART disappears where else is he going to get the 500 fiield from? |
What?
Have you tried to make sense any time recently?
He has had a full field for every Indy 500 while CART was alive and
well, and even that first couple of years when NO CART teams
essentially came.
(Galles did in 1996, as did Walker)
Quote:
|
Gone are the days of it being viable for 33 cars to roll out for one race a year |
From your mouth to God's ear.
Quote:
|
there is no way they could justify the expense of the people needed to make it happen I think. |
But we have proven time and time again you do not think very well.
It is far to hard for you.
Quote:
|
Besides which a lot of the people (drivers/Team owners/pit crews etc) are going to drift away if they ever got down to just the one race, |
Who said it eveer was going to get down to just one race, except for
you and your mindless fantasizing?
Quote:
|
......which was all very laudable but, as he has latterly found, somewhat impractical - hence why the policy (if there ever really was one) appears to have been abandoned like a cheap suit. Because when Tony announced his goals originally his intent was *not* a full time, stand alone series with an entire grid. Rather it was to stage a few races with a healthy contribution of teams from CART. The IRL was gonna bring the Americans...or at least try. Well, that's what he said.....in 96 the IRL was what? 3 or 4 races including Indy? Not very much.....on the other hand I've no doubt the CART board looked at it as a track owner trying to take control of about 20-25% of the season's racing on his own terms - I can understand why they gave him the finger on that one (particularly in conjunction with 25/8)! I still think he had a bit more on his mind than you are suggesting. |
Of course he did, but you wikll never know what it was.
CART answered by expanding its schedule to 20 races, so we know that 4
more races should not have presented either a hardship or a threat to
them.
Quote:
|
Sponsors have limits and budgets (as was pointed out here some weeks ago). The cost of running any form of Open wheel is very high - much higher than Nascar. Then you haven't been following NASCAR. As I understand it, primary sponsorship over there, for top teams, is running well over $10 million per year. UPS is reportedly paying Yates $15 mil to sponsor Jarrett's 88 car. £10M might build you about 1 1/2 cars in F1 these days (no money left for wheels to go on 'em mind you!) |
But we were not talking about F-1, Idiot Iain. We were talking about
how stupid you were to suggest that NASCAR was cheaper than CART or
the IRL.
Quote:
|
Sixteen races was hardly ever a full schedule. For any form of Open wheel it is - I can't think of pretty much any series that runs too much more than that. There's nothing special about open wheel regarding scheduling. Indeed the lack of races, leastwise here in the states, may very well contribute to its lack of popularity. You think? Interesting perspective....foreign drivers remains the biggest issue I think. |
Well, NASCAR is the most popular over here, and they run nearly 40
races a year.
What does that tell you, Mr. Wizard?
Quote:
|
Crowded shmowded. Wanna see crowded look at NASCAR. ...who's schedule is insane and about which there has been much grumbling, no? Insane? I think you mispelt highly successful. Inded it is but as far as I have heard/read there are a bunch of people who think the schedule is way too long - and I can understand why. Teams and drivers need a modicum of downtime too I think! |
Who? Name a source? Link?
Please.
Quote:
|
There is also the risk of over exposure and "viewer fatigue" to be dealt with - I'd guess that Nascar might be running quite close on those. |
Other racing series should be so lucky!
Now you are making up concepts ("viewer fatigue") to suit your
mindless and baseless drivel.
Quote:
|
Besides which, the lower levels of technology in Nascar and lower costs perhaps allow this more that would be possible in an F1/CART/IRL environment. F1? Sure. CART and IRL? No way. Tech costs are generated on the front ends of engineering and initial fabrication. Both CART and IRL have relatively stable and inexpensive technologies. Indeed, you could make an argument NASCAR should be more expensive for the simple fact it runs more races and burns thru more equipment. Certainly some of the additional tech related costs are at the front end...but a whole lot more accrue indirectly throught the season & as a result of the number of events - from the size of the crew needed to keep the technology working on the road, , to the equipment needed to keep everything running to the life expectancy of parts & engines etc etc. It's always going to cost a bunch of money to add extra races. Money the sponsors may or may not be prepared to find depending on the value they think they are deriving & where they are with their overall budgets etc etc. |
You have absolutely no idea whatsoever of what you are talking about.
#36
| |||
| |||
|
|
They didn't have to, you moron. |
learner. I think several of us have explained this already.
[snip]
Quote:
|
25/8 referred to the top 25 teams in IRL points would have guaranteed starting spots at the Indy 500. CART was not racing in January of 1996. Any CART team could have better amortized their 1995 cars by taking them to Orlando's IRL race in 1996 and having all CART teams blow off the weak 1996 IRL tams and filling the field, and hence the finishing order. This alone would have palced them in the necessary area of points without even going to the Phoenix IRL race, since literally none f the IRL teams would have garnered points at Orlando. |
have shown up at Orlando. The 75% rule was not meant to be
exclusionary. It was meant as an incentive.
[snip]
Quote:
|
Iain>25/8 was a crude attempt to drive a wedge between the CART teams fairly Iain>early one. |
proposed two other incentives before that (split season and compounded
prize money) which CART management also dumped on.
Ken Plotkin
#37
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Wed, 24 Dec 2003 09:45:29 -0800, "E. Benton Tackitt" tackitt (AT) iquest (DOT) net> wrote: And he is right. If CART had been stable, TG couldn't have done very much damage to them. All he did was aggravate an already shaky situation. I am a champcar fan but I will not give TG that much credit even though I believe that the IRL was created for just the purpose of destroying CART. I believe that CART destroyed itself by it very democratic nature. Hallelujah! |
simultaneously offer two inconsistent explanations (i.e. CART did it
themselves AND Coke-boy Clod TG did them in). Is it acceptable that
your offer contradictory explanations because it's you espouses them,
and clearly not someone you might label a "CHUMP?" You just don't
have any semblance of integrity, do you MacPagan?
================================================== ==========================
From: Billy Chapel (outofoptions (AT) outoftime (DOT) com)
Subject: Re: Isn't this really?
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport.indy
Date: 2003-12-09 17:48:08 PST
But the coke-boy clod whipped CART's ass, eh?
#38
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Thu, 25 Dec 2003 01:06:36 -0000, "Iain Miller" <donot (AT) spam (DOT) me wrote: |
might be something to be learned from them I can't be arsed to read them any
more.>
Did we get out of bed on the wrong side this morning?
I.
#39
| ||||||
| ||||||
|
|
"Smokey" <BDGIT (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote in message news:3b56cbae8cc8e06d275815429e9ef80a (AT) news (DOT) teranews.com... If I had a quarter for everytime a CHUMP puilled the 25/8 out of his ass I would be a richer man. Iain, Do you know why the 25/8 was done? Although I thought it was a bad move, it was already too late. Cart was not coming. The 25/8 just became a convenient excuse. You are suggesting that 25/8 was done after it was clear that CART wasn't coming anyway?? If that was the case then what'd they ever need 25/8 for then? If CART wasn't coming anyway as you suggest then DO tell me what it WAS for??? |
Man, you just get thicker and thicker.
It was done to entice the CART teams to come to the OTHER IRL races.
Quote:
|
As far as I can see 25/8 was done to encourage teams to come IRL racing - i.e. to split CART. CART's response/competitive strategy to the whole IRL thing at the time was to schedule against it. |
Or do both series, as TG originally intended.
Quote:
|
The CART board wanted no part of TG or his ambitions (rightly or wrongly). |
Now you are getting the hang of it.
Quote:
|
They were faced with a guy who, having made presentations to the CART board that (so I read in the archives) Pat Patrick said were amongst the most amateur he'd ever seen as a businessman |
And exactly who said that Pat Patrick said that?
Quote:
|
and who then suddenly announces he wants to run what was effectively a series within a series (cos it wasn't meant to be competition to CART, of course!). |
Suddenly? Suddenly? You have got to be kidding. Suddenly?
He warned he would do it for THREE years!
Quote:
|
So the CART board decided to run a "scorched earth" competitive strategy. Ultimately it didn't work. |
Now you are getting back to the hang of it.
#40
| |||
| |||
|
|
Last time I checked |
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-HAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-HAAAAAAAAAAAAA!
He's never checked on ANYTHING in his life!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-HAAAAAAAAAAAA-HAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!
Philip! Checking on something!
Now THAT'S funny!
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.