Q: Please ask IMSA why they have decided to drop the GTP class from Mosport? I think this decision needs to be reversed and they must take a full field to Mosport. It’s a matter of integrity. Their only event outside the U.S. is Mosport, and they chose to damage its lure by telling the Canadian (and American) fans that they are not worthy to see the fastest cars on the fastest racecourse! Will it be televised on NBC network this time sans GTP?
If circuit size or pitlane size is the problem, such as at Lime Rock Park, I can understand that they split the field to race, but still expect to see the GTP on the same weekend in a separate race.
Why can’t every IMSA weekend showcase all the classes? What is the point of having a good collection of entrants and quality cars if they are not being showcased on any given weekend?
Adam Lipcsey, Toronto, Ontario
MP: I hear you, Adam, but if we use that approach, IMSA’s also told fans in Connecticut with the dropped Lime Rock event that they no longer matter, and in recent years, that attendees of the GT-only Lime Rock event and the GT-only VIR rounds aren’t worthy of having prototypes, so I don’t see this as some Canada-specific offense.
To keep costs under some semblance of control in the most expensive class, IMSA has been strict in limiting DPi/GTP to 10 races in most seasons. The return of Detroit, which is sponsored by and the home event for GM, was an obvious place for the Cadillac GTPs and the Corvette GTDs to play in front of the Motown crowd, so with the addition of Detroit, IMSA’s 10-race commitment to its GTP manufacturers and teams was maintained and Mosport was the chosen sacrifice.
IMSA rarely makes a major decision like this without heavy input from its manufacturers and partners. Let’s hope they place a greater demand on adding GTP back to Mosport in the near future.
Q: There’s been a lot of complaints about commercials, but I realize they are necessary and part of all commercial TV, and to use the F1 deal as an example is unfair. I DVR the races so I can avoid sitting through the commercials, even when it’s side by side coverage. What I will complain about is the Nashville race went to commercial on lap 5. Lap 5? Seriously? You settle in to watch a race, and less than seven minutes in they cut to commercial. Another complaint I have is, after I have sat through four minutes of commercials — I mean, fast-forward through the commercials — we are treated to 20 or 30 seconds of Iowa cornfields or a city skyline. Why? Can’t they come out of commercial right back to racing? That doesn’t seem like a big ask.
Also, can you explain the difference between the start getting waved off because the field wasn’t packed up, and getting the green the next lap? The field looked exactly same to me on both laps at Nashville.
Dave
MP: They can come out of commercials right back into the racing, no doubt, but they aren’t perfect. As I saw it, the waved-off start had the back half of the field in disarray and the next attempt was better in that regard.
Q: For all the IndyCar complainers, I’m in the Old Guy demographic that the series apparently appeals to. I wish there were more races, more engine manufacturers, a more modern chassis, more tracks, more short ovals, more media promotion, more consistent officiating, easier passing, less dominance by money, and less commercials on NBC. But that doesn’t change the fact that IndyCar is the best racing on TV. So I watch the races on DVR and speed through the commercials. It’s still better than 90% of what’s on TV.
Robert, Washoe Valley, NV
MP: Amen, brother.
Q: What is the typical decision threshold teams encounter when deciding to make a unapproved engine change, given the associated grid penalty? Wouldn’t the engine manufacturer be able to diagnose and determine the overall health?
Doug, Brownsburg, IN
MP: All depends on what happens and where, Doug. A full cleanroom-style lab that you’d find at GM Powertrain/Ilmor Engineering/Honda Performance Development isn’t something they have at the track, so if there’s a concern about something internal, there are limits to what Chevy or Honda would want to crack open and inspect at the track.
There’s also the hope and timing part, like with the David Malukas fire in the engine bay. Malukas and the team hoped they’d be able to use the motor at the Indy GP last weekend and avoid going to a fifth engine, but HPD wanted to do a deep dive on the engine so it was yanked and a fifth motor was installed, which triggered the six-spot grid penalty. If they had the option, they’d rather have gone to a fifth engine at the next race on the Gateway oval where, despite the penalty being nine spots, it would be much easier to erase the deficit than the six on a road course
Q: I’m crushed for Graham Rahal as he had the best car on Saturday. But I totally admit watching Graham run down Dixon at the end of the race was hella entertaining. RLL has come so far since Indy. I hope the team left the track with their heads held high. They worked their butts off and it’s showing on the track. To lose to the best driver of this IndyCar era is nothing to be gutted about.
Now onto the real question of my email. After last year and this year, I get the sense Zak Brown is someone who likes to do things purely for the sake of stirring things up. I don’t pay enough attention to what Zak Brown does in F1, so maybe Chris Medland can chime in, but this just seems like it’s just his nature. Like a cat that demands pets, but then shreds your hands.
Thanks for reporting on the silly season with what information you have. Until Palou or Ericsson sign a legally binding contract and announce it, the drivers and fans are just in a holding pattern.
John
MP: There’s no doubt that Zak loves to goad Ganassi, but I wouldn’t dismiss his actions as being strictly for the sake of stirring the pot. He thought Piastri would be the better driver for his F1 team, and went and got him. Presented with a chance to improve his IndyCar team, he went hard to get Palou, and who knows where that situation will end up. I’m not saying he’s an angel, but I wouldn’t paint him as the devil. His methods are bullish, but no more so than a Christian Horner or Toto Wolff. If I had my say, we’d leave the drama to F1 and spare our tight-knit IndyCar community from this stuff, but that’s no longer an option.
CHRIS MEDLAND: From an F1 perspective, Zak’s never been afraid of upsetting anyone, but more in the sense of doing whatever he thinks it takes to get the best for his team.
If you look at where the McLaren team was in F1 when he was appointed and where it is now, it’s a very different image but it’s certainly a team that has been turned around and is showing a lot of potential, so I don’t think we can say that approach isn’t working. But Zak’s a marketing man who also loves to get behind the wheel himself, so competition is something he’s fed off — and been successful at — for a while, so I do think he sometimes goes looking for it.