Q: I loved the explanation of the old pop-off valves in last week’s Mailbag. Reminded me of the time that Jerry Sneva tried monkeying with it at the end of a qualification run at Indy. Didn’t he stop in his pit quickly after the run to have the team remove a bolt that had been fashioned to prevent the valve from opening before proceeding to the photo/tech area? Did he really think he would get away with it with half the racing world watching?
Mike Hutton, Lake in the Hills, IL
MP: Could you imagine if that same thing was attempted today with 100X zoom TV cameras shooting in HD? We’d see every thread on the bolt in 4K60 resolutions.
Q: While I get that everyone is upset about what has happened at Team Penske. let’s face it: The real big issue is getting manufacturers interested in IndyCar. As fans we thought Penske taking over that would change. Clearly that has not happened.
You have Honda possibly moving to NASCAR, as well as Hyundai. IMSA has 15 manufacturers, NASCAR is on the verge of five. It begs the question: what are they doing right, and what is IndyCar doing wrong? Clearly something is amiss with the leadership.
Maybe it’s time just to have Ilmor and Cosworth to provide engines and focus on proper promotions and then maybe manufacturers will ask to come.
David
MP: IMSA has 18, I believe. Yep, as I’ve written in recent months, and probably need to write again, the series has one path forward to getting manufacturers interested, and that’s to go with Honda’s recommendation of using a mostly spec internal combustion engine that costs very little — compared to today’s costs — to acquire and badge as their own, and from there, let manufacturers decide how much they want to play and spend on energy recovery systems. The ERS side is what interests most manufacturers who are in or wanting to enter racing. Make the ICE the small financial component, come up with a smart approach to giving them limited ERS development to add some individualization, and they’d give themselves the best chance possible to add auto brands to the series.
Q: First, let me say that with a couple of exceptions, I like and admire the talent of every driver currently racing in IndyCar. But when it comes to the question of why it has fallen so far in popularity among American racing fans, I think we have to address the elephant in the room.
As racing journalist John Oreovicz once pointed out many years ago, the infamous 1996 Split in IndyCar was really the end result of the contentious 1979 battle which ended in owners wresting control away from USAC and forming CART. The disagreement between the direction of the series never totally went away.
Of the three major series that existed in the 1970s — IndyCar, NASCAR and F1 — only one chose to radically shift its structure and focus away from its historic roots. In its flourishing heyday, Champ Car was an American oval series with primarily American drivers on the regular schedule which was anchored by a huge oval race at Indianapolis that traditionally attracted an international field. Two or three street and road courses were added to spice things up, which also attracted a few well-known drivers from outside the series.
Fast forward to today where it is primarily a road and street course series with only one third of the field composed of American drivers, and of those, only three or four with competitive rides. Add to this the fact that only six Americans have won the Indy 500 in the last 20 years while only four have won the championship, is it any wonder that you have a steady decline in American racing fans?
Imagine if NASCAR had inexplicably taken the same direction, i.e. changing its format to primarily road and street courses dominated by international drivers. Or if F1 had morphed into mostly a European oval racing competition featuring a dominant majority of American drivers.
I remember back during the Split, team owner Derrick Walker saying to the media, “I don’t know what our competition is, but I know it isn’t NASCAR.” Not to be outdone, Pat Patrick chimed in, “If people want to see American open-wheel drivers, they’ve got sprint cars.”
These sorts of attitudes got us where we are today.
I once shared this point of view with Robin Miller, who I greatly admired, with the further comment: “When you watch the Olympics, who are you most likely to root for?” Though he agreed with some of my points, his final response to the “Who do you root for?” question was that the two most popular drivers in the series were Tony Kanaan and Helio. Touché.
But I might add that Robin’s answer only took into consideration present fans who, like me, would follow the series regardless. Personally, I would just as soon watch a tractor pull as a NASCAR race. But NASCAR knew how to manage and promote a racing series to American fans. Sometimes I think those who run IndyCar really don’t want “those kinds” of fans, i.e., that it would rather remain elitist than broadly popular in America.
If so, they have succeeded.
John
MP: And yet, American racing fans are watching more F1 than ever where only a single and not particularly spectacular American driver is involved, meaning 19 of the 20 aren’t American, and the one that is rarely finds himself somewhere other than last.
Since we are about as multi-cultural as it gets, we also have a lot of people in America who might not be born and raised here, but are certainly capable of liking IndyCar and rooting for Americans and Brits and Kiwis and Spaniards and Swedes and the rest.
I’m answering while watching the NBA playoffs where its best player — the MVP — in three of the last four seasons is Serbia’s Nicola Jokic. Among the other top/most popular players, they hail from Slovenia, Greece, Cameroon, France and Canada, and one in about every five NBA players are now international players; more than ever. And the league is only continuing to become more popular while becoming “less American.” I just don’t buy this argument.