The RACER Mailbag, April 3

Welcome to the RACER Mailbag. Questions for any of RACER’s writers can be sent to mailbag@racer.com. We can’t guarantee that every letter will be published, but we’ll answer as many as we can. Published questions may be edited for length and …

Q: The Thermal Club $1 Million Challenge came and went. From when it was announced, through long after race winner Alex Palou was back home in Indiana, the event stimulated articles, texts, posts, shares, re-tweets, etc. about the event. Many were far too negative. As an IndyCar fan, I was an embarrassed social media non-participant.

IndyCar and The Thermal Club stepped up and pulled it off.  Good on them.

Full disclosure, I work for the Podium Club at Attesa, a private membership racing complex for cars and motorcycles located halfway between Phoenix and Tucson. We have a 2.32-mile road racing circuit designed to meet FIA and FIM safety specs at buildout, plus trackside luxury homes, garage mahals, a motorsports-dedicated industrial district, commerce park and more.

Sound familiar?

I share this because The Thermal Club is not our competition and there is nothing about their facility anyone can complain about. Well, other than the fully armed, dressed-in-tactical-gear private security contractors. The Proud Boys look at family-friendly events will never be positive. Just saying.

Thermal did an excellent job. Hats off to Don Cusick, who may have been the strongest mover and shaker in getting the event on the schedule. The broadcast on NBC, not USA or exclusively Peacock, was a tremendous infomercial, worth every dollar they invested, also providing a welcomed bridge between St. Petersburg and Long Beach.

My problem was the race format. Nice try but not really worth watching again.

I have a suggestion, based on U.S. Supercross Triple Crown events.

Next year, if there is a next year, the new $2 Million Challenge should consist of practice and qualifying  on Saturday, with race day on Sunday — featuring three races, a la the three-feature Supercross format, or NASCAR’s stage concept but with very short stops in between.

Race one is a sprint: Every car starts on their choice of tires, no necessary pit stops, X number of laps (when you see X, it means smart people, not me, will determine the number of laps re: tire wear vs fuel mileage).

The race one finishing order sets race two’s starting lineup.

Race two is X laps, long enough to require a pit stop for fuel and/or tires, and the finish position determines the grid for the main event. All cars must start on the tires they finished with in race two.

Race three, the feature, is X laps requiring two pit stops, no restrictions on tire choice.

The driver with the lowest average finish position over all three races wins $1 million. The rest of the field splits the other million.

I like IndyCar doing something outside the box, especially to compensate for its goofy scheduling that starts too late and ends too early with a huge gap between the first two points races.

IndyCar doesn’t have an all-star race. This could be the next best thing.

Bill Tybur, Phoenix, AZ

MP: And…your name has also been submitted for the vacant “Thermal Club $1,000,000 (-500,000) Challenge Creative Director” job title.

We’ll have a caption competition for this one. I’ve got nothing. Michael Levitt/Motorsport Images

Q: Back in the ’70s, F5000 was an incredibly popular series. There were numerous chassis and engine choices. And to keep it interesting, they ran heat races. No fuel stops, no tire changes. Flat-out racing for around 100 miles or so. If IndyCar is interested in trying something new, there it is.

Heat distances could be calculated based on fuel consumption. Tires choice is free. Flat-out short races. No fuel conservation. Races scored using the Olympic system where the winner gets one point, second gets two, etc. Lowest points wins outright. Two, maybe three heats. Thermal would be the perfect place to test this.

Mike Talarico, Charlotte, NC

MP: We have no shortage of interesting ideas for the series to try.

Q: I watched some of the Thermal practice/qualifying streaming on Peacock in addition to the race. I understand your criticisms and believe that flaws in the racing format are amply brought to light from the interested parties. Actually doing an event is the only way to address the flaws and prepare for improvements. Note that for all the hype, Nashville was a dumpster fire as you put it, especially the first time out of the gate from both a track and paying spectators perspective.

As you rightly said, they went outside of the box and that is a rarity in IndyCar. So, give them credit. I viewed this as an exhibition and an outreach to wealthy enthusiasts who can see the IndyCar paddock, ownership and teams up close.

In other words, a business entertainment effort designed as much to attract additional capital into the sport as to plug a gaping hole in the IndyCar schedule. From that lens, it may be a successful venture but only time will tell.

From a racing perspective, it was a mixed bag at best. The drivers have racing DNA and I suspect if the purse was zero they would race wheel-to-wheel bound only by their car owners’ instructions.

Lastly, the track is a great country club track, especially for sports/vintage cars. As a track for IndyCar, not so much. There were no great passing zones like a Road America, and all the high-speed corners kill handling in the dirty air for the close followers.

I am glad they tried something new, emphasis on “tried.”

Emmett, Dallas

MP: Thanks for writing in, Emmett.

Q: I loved the Thermal race, but the first half of the feature needs fixing. The solution to the problem: Drivers must finish on the lead lap to advance, and the last two cars running no not advance. There would be a race at the front and rear of the field. (If concerned about car count for the last 10 laps, let 12 cars start the first half)

Richard Marley, Warner Robins, GA

MP: Another option!

Q: I approve of the series trying the Thermal experiment. Why couldn’t it have just been a normal race? I’m sure that’s been said but I forget the answer.

If the event stays, they need to make the actual contest open to all the cars and make it like musical chairs. If 27 cars are entered, the event is 27 laps. Whoever is last after lap one is eliminated. Down to 26 cars, and 26 laps to go. Whoever is last after a completed lap is eliminated. And so on down to the last two cars. That means you have action on every lap for the TV announcers to focus on, and also when the midfield starts to get within a couple laps they will push to not get into the danger zone. Then people have ran hard enough through the field where tire deg comes into play for last few laps for the last couple cars.

Tell me what’s wrong with this plan?

Steve

MP: Of all the ideas I’ve seen so far in this Mailbag, yours is my favorite.