New stats keep fans in 'loop'
The National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing is compiling dozens
of new statistics to give fans, drivers and crew members additional
insight into why races finish the way they do.
at http://www.washtimes.com/national/20060303-114404-3337r.htm

yared22311 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com wrote:
That's great. I like messing around with statistics, and up until now,
NASCAR had been sorely lacking in the statistics department. Here's
hoping that sites such as nascar.com, jayski, etc. put these stats out
for the public, instead of keeping them as 'premium" paid features for
fantasy racers.

"! (formerly WWWW....)" <IllustriousPotentate (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote

Have you checked out this site? www.racing-reference.com

"! (formerly WWWW....)" <IllustriousPotentate (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote

They're just trying to track things that crews and the like have tracked for
years, I know I was in a discussion here earlier this year, and said a stop
watch to measure time through the corners was still a staple for CC's far
and wide, and now this from that link above:

"But he won the race, data shows, largely because he was among the fastest
drivers in the turns." referring to Mark Martin in the CTS truck race who
was apparently only 12th fastest on back stretch speeds and 11th fastest on
front stretch speeds...or thereabouts.

But for NASCAR stats, they aren't "sorely missing", they aren't even well
hidden:

www.racing-reference.com has some pretty good ones.

http://www.speedwaymedia.com/Articles/06/030106Jackson.asp and this fella
over at Speedway Media tends to be the statmaster among the internet writers
covering the sport.

It just looks like NASCAR wants to come in with a few stat lines that
haven't been covered very well publicly, but watch some practice coverage or
interviews with drivers or CCs, and you'll here straight speeds and
cornering times discussed all the time.

"SimRacer" <nOspaM@simracer68 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote

to catch up now from their woefully inadequate 'Ofishul N Stats'
they should have publicly posted many years ago.

I think NA$CAr is playing to their 'mathematically-challenged' fan base
to put out any kind of crap to get an argument going as to which driver
'should have won the race because...'
Aren't N-'rulings' enuf to generate talk?

One of the reasons i continue to post N Stats is because there is
NO Speculation as to why a driver won...He won because he won!
He also got a Top5 or Top10 because he accomplished that.
There is NO reason for confusing those issues.

How they got to those results may cause discussion but,
Results are what they are--Results!
(Unless N sez Bobby Allison's '71 Win in a Mustang doesn't count.)

CRU-thanking those who know me

"Crusader" <cru32 (AT) comcast (DOT) net> wrote

Aww shucks Cru, we only claim to know you when it benefits us.... ;-p lol

The rest of the time, yore math gives me a headache. Of course, math wuz my
second worstest skool subject, rite behind Engwish....French was my best
subject, mainly because I didn't have to be on campus or in class to
practice it... ;-)

Crusader wrote:
These actually are fairly new stats. They're generated by the scoring
loops and all the tracks didn't have scoring loops till late '03. Teams
obviously kept their own stats before the loops but the loops don't
care what color the car is.

Exactly. Box scores for Nascar. Might even bring in a new stat junkie
or 2 to the sport. I had to look up the dates on the scoring loops and
stumbled across this...

http://www.nascar.com/2004/news/headlines/cup/04/30/notebook_friday/index.html

Turns out they wanted to keep the whole thing secret but Gordon ruined
it for them. Can you imagine?

The new stats are being test driven for free on truckseries.com (bottom
left corner of main page).

Explanation of the stats here...

http://www.truckseries.com/cgi-script/NCTS_06/articles/000062/006298.htm

Not impressed yet but my favorite driver hasn't impressed yet either.
We'll see.