On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 11:50:38 CST, John McCoy <igopogo (AT) ix (DOT) netcom.com> wrote in <Xns9CB97C3A28935pogosupernews (AT) 216 (DOT) 168.3.30>:

It was a strategic move that paid off well.

He was in a position to drive through the wrecks.

He gassed up at the right time.

His choices paid off handsomely.

I don't see why you won't give him and Chad their
props. Luck favors those who are well prepared.

Marty
--
Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.

"Martin X. Moleski, SJ" <moleski (AT) canisius (DOT) edu> wrote

I do not think that the 48 was any better prepared than the 5 or 24.

On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 13:29:42 CST, "armpit" <armarmpitpit (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote in <5pidnfsSXPSHS2zXnZ2dnUVZ_hudnZ2d (AT) giganews (DOT) com>:

I'd say that the 48's results over the last 3.5 Chases are
the result of better preparation and execution than
that of the 5 and the 24.

I don't think JJ is a three time champ by accident nor
do I think his move from 36th to 6th was just an accident.

And I don't like JJ. I hate it when he wins. But I give
credit where credit seems to be due. Seems to me that
he drove a smart race and reaped the rewards of doing so.

Marty
--
Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.

"Martin X. Moleski, SJ" <moleski (AT) canisius (DOT) edu> wrote in
news:Ld6dnTNf3JdofWzXnZ2dnUVZ_txi4p2d (AT) supernews (DOT) com:

Over all the chases, or even the chase races prior to Dega
this year, yeah, I'd give you that. They have things together
on all fronts.

I think you've failed to actually understand the race, perhaps
because (as you said) you didn't watch the whole of it. Johnson
was stuck at the back, not, by all the evidence, because of a
strategic choice, but because that's how good he/his car were.
When it was time to go, with 15 laps or so to go, he moved all
the way from 33d to 28th. Remove two big wrecks and a bunch
of folk running out of gas, and run the race green to the finish,
and he'd have finished 20th if he was lucky.

Remember, M Waltrip started out just behind Johnson w/ 10 to go,
and finished just behind him. No-one would suggest Waltrip (or
his team) are anywhere near Johnson in skill.

(I will give Knaus credit for a good call on the last gas stop,
tho. That was definately seizing the moment).

Face it, sometimes you're good, and sometimes you're lucky. That
race was one where Johnson was lucky.

John

On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 17:01:58 CST, John McCoy <igopogo (AT) ix (DOT) netcom.com> wrote in <Xns9CB9B76624EE1pogosupernews (AT) 216 (DOT) 168.3.30>:

It's not inconceivable. But I was aware of the fact
that he was hanging back--even running last at one
point--apparently as part of a strategy.

That's not what I heard. I sure can't testify that I
heard all of the commentary.

I've heard people say that coming up 17 places in four laps
is no big deal in a plate race, that it takes no special
preparation or talent. Now you seem to be saying that it
does. I don't see how you can have it both ways.

MW has only won at plate races.

MW was giving JJ one heck of a ride in practice when
NASCAR said, "That's what you can't do any more."

I'm not denying some element of luck in winning any
race. I'm not saying that the plate races don't
bring out the luck factor more than other kinds of
races. I do think that some teams and drivers
deserve credit for consistently doing better than
others at the plate races. In other words, I don't
buy Jr.'s sour grapes approach that it's nothing
but luck.

Marty
--
Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.

On 11/4/09 19:36, in article 16idneq8M9mSg2_XnZ2dnUVZ_hqdnZ2d (AT...news (DOT) com,
"Martin X. Moleski, SJ" <moleski (AT) canisius (DOT) edu> wrote:

Whatever the reality (and it's usually somewhere out in the middle), the
truth is that the guys who manage to get it done will argue that it's more
skill than luck, and the guys who can't get it done tend to argue it's more
luck than skill..........

Seems to me that if you argue that this race that you run in time after time
is "nothing but dumb luck" who wins, sooner or later almost anyone should
win it....and if it really is "nothing but dumb luck", there shouldn't be
repeat winners, or any perception on anyone's part that there are drivers
who are better at plate racing than others.

The results don't fit the model. Ergo, the model is flawed. To what degree
is probably unprovable.

--pig

On 11/4/09 23:36, in article hctkom$2cog$1 (AT) adenine (DOT) netfront.net, "Chuck
Steak" <chuck_steak (AT) nospam (DOT) com> wrote:

They made their move late enough that I'd stopped believing the
commentators' "JJ has a real fast car, he's just hanging back on purpose"
and started to believe that for whatever reason, the 48 was doing the best
the 48 could, and that JJ & Chad had uncharacteristically blown it that
week.

I'm still not entirely sure that they didn't have problems that circumstance
dug them out of, to be honest. No way to tell......

--pig

"Martin X. Moleski, SJ" <moleski (AT) canisius (DOT) edu> wrote

What specifically, was the strategy? It was a by gosh, by golly move.
Strategy involves a plan and execution of that plan. Coincidentl events
that play out in one's favor are not the same as a strategy.

Pure restrictor plate track luck of the draw.

Luck - not strategy.

Luck again - but I don't deny him that luck.

You said it - luck. They don't deserve props for things that play out for
them - or maybe better said, in spite of them. They really did not envision
that outcome. Rather - they rolled the dice on an outcome they hoped for,
and lucked out.

I have no problem with Johnson's position at the end of the race. I do have
a problem with declaring that to have been a strategy. Strategy hell - they
were hoping for anything better than where they were. Nothing more precise
than that. That does not constitute a strategy.

--

-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE (AT) windstream (DOT) net

"Martin X. Moleski, SJ" <moleski (AT) canisius (DOT) edu> wrote

I agree that the 48 is better able to pull things together than any other
team... Not by preparation though. They have a definite ability to pull a
bad car together than anyone else - reminiscent of the days of Ray Evernhan
and Jeff...

Come on Marty - this is plate track racing. Everyone in the pack moved up
like that. And back again. Do you really not believe that Johnson would
have been hung out to dry before it was all over, if the wreck had not
happened. Maybe that's part of the issue - it's not as easy to hang a guy
out to dry as it used to be, and you're giving credit to Johnson for things
that aren't of his doing. Net is the same - johnson got lucky that the
flags came out when they did or he might well have been tens of cars back
from where he was. It happened to everyone else, why not him?
Why? Simply because he wound up where he did? By your logic, he drove a
stupid race the day that Mark Martin drove him off the track on a restart.


--

-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE (AT) windstream (DOT) net

"Listpig" <listpig (AT) earthlink (DOT) net> wrote

So - kindly quote the winners who claim it was skill. Or any others who
claim that RP tracks come down to skill. Though your point sounds like it
might be valid, it does not stand up in the face of the evidence.

Maybe you should invest time in understanding the difference between "dumb
luck" and statements about luck.

Nice... but meaningless.

--

-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE (AT) windstream (DOT) net