Q: “The new name for AlphaTauri has been confirmed, with the Formula 1 team rebranding as ‘Visa Cash App RB’ as part of a major new Red Bull partnership.” No effin’ thanks.
Upon further reflection it’s probably keeping the team on the grid, so I suppose that is good.
That team name is still the worst though.
Jake
CHRIS MEDLAND: It’s hard to argue with you, Jake. It’s nothing against Visa or Cash App — sponsors are great in funding the racing teams that we love to watch – but it’s the lack of overall identity for the team now. When you get a title sponsor for a team you usually still have the chassis manufacturer (Stake is the F1 team but Sauber manufactures the chassis) so even if it’s a change in identity and naming, you still see the lineage and identity of the team.
But I feel like Visa Cash App RB has totally lost that, because “RB” has no identity. It’s Racing Bulls, but also obviously a nod to Red Bull, and either way massively confusing to some fans. Toro Rosso tipped its hat to the Italian heritage of Minardi, so would have been an identity to return to with title sponsorship from Visa and Cash App, but it feels like teams now are moving more and more towards trying to force the name to be the title sponsor and nothing else.
It’s nothing against those sponsors, it’s just potentially damaging, in my opinion, because you could lose the identity of a team, that would then make fans far less likely to connect with it, and therefore the value of that sponsorship goes down (as does the value of the team overall without interested supporters).
Q: What are we to make of F1 filing for trademarks on various forms of “Grand Prix of Chicago”? Are they looking for a possible North American tripleheader with Miami-Montreal-Chicago in June?
I assume an F1 track would have to be longer than the NASCAR track?
Ed Joras
CM: So I’ve done a bit of digging here, Ed, and sadly at this point there’s nothing to read into. There have been whispers of an expression of interest from Chicago, but a large number of locations regularly do the same to generate a bit of buzz and it doesn’t mean F1 has reciprocated or moved it any further than that.
But sometimes a trademark needs protecting just in case, so I understand it’s more an example of F1 ensuring it owns the rights to those names rather than a group that might be interested in putting on a race, because if in future there was the potential to make a race happen but it’s not that group promoting it then you’ve got a problem to solve.
As a Cubs fan who loves going to Chicago, believe me I was straight on the case with this one and will keep my ear to the ground in case it becomes something more, but at this point I’m not led to believe it’s a significant development.
And as for the length of any circuit — there’s no reason it would need to be longer than the NASCAR one (though it would likely need different run-offs, etc., which would mean a different layout would be needed). Monaco’s an exception, but I believe FIA Grade 1 requirements are for a track of 3.5km minimum length, which the Chicago NASCAR one just hits.
Q: What are the expectations for Hailie Deegan in 2024 in the NASCAR Xfinity Series?
Kurt Perleberg
KELLY CRANDALL: It’s a bit hard to put expectations on Deegan when she’s only run one NASCAR Xfinity Series race. But given how she seemed to adapt well and is more comfortable in the car versus the truck, I’m looking at Deegan to be a top 20 driver this season. Deegan will need to gel with a new team and new series, which has a really stacked field of competition of this season, and finish races. It’s a long season, so there is plenty of time to build. If she can do that and the team, AM Racing, gets what their equipment is capable of and uses the resources of Ford, then I don’t see why top 20s would be out of reach.
Q: I saw a recent article about a bump for Formula E viewing figures in the U.S. and I was intrigued to see if the UK would be mentioned, and it was. I was very surprised to see a “substantial rise of 29 percent” in the UK, when I had heard that viewing figures were particularly hideous. Would you be able to provide further information on the viewing figures and how you come to the conclusion of there being a rise?
Danny Morgan, Southend-on-Sea, England
DOMINIK WILDE: There did seem to be a backlash among the fan base to the decision to move the UK coverage behind a paywall, so the substantial rise was a surprise. I asked the series where those figures came from, and they told me its “official BARB data provided by Kantar.” [ED: To help decode that, BARB is the UK-based Broadcasters’ Audience Research Board, and Kantar is an independent data analytics firm.]
THE FINAL WORD
From Robin Miller’s Mailbag, January 31, 2018
Q: I have been watching a lot of classic racing on YouTube. I had planned to write to you about the glorious Can-Am series, but then I watched the 1981 Indy 500. I am sure you know the story, so please give us your take on it. I find myself siding with Uncle Bobby. Am I wrong?
John Masden, Georgetown, IN
ROBIN MILLER: One night about 10 years ago I had the pleasure of watching the 1981 Indy 500 with Gordon Johncock and Uncle Bobby. Johncock had never watched a replay of his Indy wins, let alone somebody else’s, so he was an interested spectator. When Unser passed 11-13 cars (I lost count), Gordy screamed: “Jesus Christ Unser, how many cars did you pass?” like it was a revelation. Bobby told him it was ancient history and no big deal because he had the field covered.
Here’s my take: Mario also passed several cars exiting the pits, so they both took advantage of a nebulous rule that USAC’s observers obviously didn’t follow during the race. Had it not been tape-delayed on ABC and had someone not tipped off Jackie Stewart, I doubt anything would have ever been said — let alone the protest, the crowning of Andretti the next morning, the other protest and the re-instatement of Unser. The easy penalty for something like this would have been a $50,000 fine, because Unser didn’t need to cheat the blend rule to win that race. And the blend rule was anything but set in stone in the shaky USAC rule book.