Q: As a long-time Indy 500 fan and attendee, I am obviously concerned about the talk about guaranteed starting spots. And while no one wants to go back to the days of 25/8, I do believe there is a compromise that exists that would satisfy both the traditionalists and the car owners. It goes like this:
The fastest 33 always start the race, as usual.
If you are a season-long “charter” team and are not one of the 33 fastest, you can still race, but you must watch the start from your pit box, joining the other 33 after the leader completes two laps (or more, depending on how big you want the penalty to be).
This would accomplish several objectives:
Maintains 33 starters (11 rows of three to start the race)
Allows charter teams to guarantee Indy 500 participation to their sponsors (but does not guarantee a place in the opening laps).
Maintains Bump Day drama (getting bumped from the 33 starters would be devasting to charter teams, but would not be financially fatal)
The focus needs to be on guaranteed participation in the race, not guaranteed opportunity to take the opening green flag. A severe starting penalty would put the kibosh on any chances of winning the race, but would still satisfy the participation aspect that owners and sponsors so desperately need to survive financially. Bump Day would still be stressful, as you would not want your race to go in the dumpster before it begins.
Once the 33 take the green and put in a few laps, it would not bother me one bit if another car or two hits the track. I get to see my 11 rows of three. And historically there have been many times that more than 33 cars participated (including 1911).
I truly think a participation penalty of this type for charter teams would work to satisfy all involved. So what am I missing? Feel free to poke holes in this plan.
Kevin, Fishers, IN
MP: All are interesting concepts to ponder. As I’ve told more than a few people who’ve asked, this is a genie that won’t be placed back in the bottle; Penske wants guaranteed starting positions at every race, and if the failed attempt to launch the “Leaders Circle Membership” about three months ago is revived, I’m sure the guaranteed spots will be a centerpiece of the program.
We can dress up the guaranteed spots thing with all kinds of new scenarios and provisos, but I’ll always come back to our biggest race, the one that’s defined IndyCar for more than a century, as being something that needs to be treated with respect and have its key traditions preserved.
We just concluded the NFL season where its 32 teams went into the championship with equal opportunities to play in the Super Bowl, but no team was guaranteed a spot in the big game before the season began, and that’s the way it should be there and here.
Q: Hi Kelly. While watching the Daytona 500, it struck me how competitive the field is; it seemed like every organization had at least one car strong enough to legitimately compete for the win. Last year, you could always point to Live Fast Motorsports and Rick Ware Racing as the weak links in the field. But now that LFM is gone and RWR has shown impressive speed so far, I can’t really point to any chartered organization as a weak link in this year’s field.
Top to bottom, could this be the most competitive field in NASCAR Cup Series history?
Garrick
KELLY CRANDALL: I’m not sure if you could say it definitively, but ytou could make a strong argument. Rick Ware Racing has made steps each year to try and get better and now it has a talented driver in Justin Haley and will continue its alliance with RFK Racing. Front Row Motorsports is getting more support from Ford and just entered into an alliance with Team Penske. Spire Motorsports also continues to put as many resources into its program each year to take a step forward.
So I certainly think the field has taken a step forward in competitiveness and it’ll make for better racing and a closer gap. And to be clear, I said closer but not gone. Those teams will have a ways to go to win races but there is a different definition of what success is for each team in the garage.
One last thing — Robby Benton, the president of Rick Ware Racing, actually told the media in January that he believes this will be the most competitive field in Cup Series history because of the depth of teams and the depth of drivers.
Q: Concerning the question raised by Willem in the February 14 Mailbag — based own the 2024 sporting regulations, Max Verstappen would not be allowed to participate in F2 and/or F3 on the same weekend as an F1 race
From the F2 Sporting Regulations:
26.5 Any driver nominated to race by a Competitor participating in the FIA Formula One World Championship will not be permitted to participate in the FIA Formula 2 Championship in the same Competition
From the F3 Sporting Regulations:
26.5 Any driver nominated to race by a Competitor participating in the FIA Formula One World Championship or in the FIA Formula 2 Championship will not be permitted to participate in the FIA Formula 3 Championship in the same event.
Richard, Michigan
CHRIS MEDLAND: That’s a very good point, although in my defense, Willem just asked if he could go for all three titles, and he technically could but would have to pick and choose what he raced in each weekend, skipping some rounds in each championship based on clashes. But to be totally honest I can’t pretend to be clever enough to say that’s how I was asking the question last week — much more simply it’s that just because you’ve raced in F1 doesn’t prevent you dropping down to F2 or F3. Giorgio Pantano did exactly that in the mid-2000s, racing for Jordan in 2004 and then dropping down to GP2 and winning the title in 2008. Roberto Merhi also did it more recently, making F2 appearances after F1 drives.