The Tangled Web of the US National Championships

[Don Capps]

I saw this elsewhere and felt compelled to write something:

Wikipedia states that the ChampCar brand and history is now owned by IndyCar.

Wrongkipedia strikes yet again.

Only ChampCar could ever own its history, no one else....

What happened was that part of the deal, as I understand it, was that the Indy Racing League/IndyCar got the physical records of the series. To some, that the IRL/ICR took possession of the "records" of ChampCar was interpreted as literally the records, the history of ChampCar. This was not the case.

Nor did ChampCar "own" the history of CART.

Nor did USAC "own" the history of the AAA.

The IRL/ICS was formed in 1994 and had its first season in 1996, which is its history in a nutshell.

CART was formed in 1978 and had its first season in 1979, folding at the end of the 2003 season.

ChampCar was formed in 2004 and folded at the end of the 2007 season, its assets being sold in 2008 to IRL/ICS.

USAC was formed in 1955 and had its first season in 1956, its national championship division dying for intents in purposes 1980 when it withdrew form the Championship Racing League arrangement with CART and the Gold Crown series was created for the 1981 season.

The AAA was formed in 1902, held its first championship in 1905, another "first" champonship in 1916, and then from 1920 - 1941, and 1946-1955 ran its national championship.

So, you have the AAA, USAC, CART, IRL/ICS, and ChampCar histories and championships, which are often blurred and a bit fuzzy in many cases, but basically separate entities for study. True, there are some who take great exception to viewing it this way, but they are inclined to do so not from the viewpoint of the historian.

It should be added that the early history of AAA national championship racing as usually presented is a fraud and should be ignored. Russ Catlin, Val Haresnape, and Arthur Means managed to screw it up royally, with there still being those who think that what is often found on the Web or in various books is correct. It is not.

[Dr. Krogshöj]

Bashing Wikipedia is stupid... If one finds factually incorrect information, they should log in and rewrite it. That's the whole point of the project. Anyway, I don't know if statistics can be "owned" as such, but I am sure glad that IndyCar will include AAA/USAC/CART/CCWS stats. Sorry, Scott Dixon, but you are not the winningest Indy Car driver, A.J. Foyt is.

[Don Capps]

Bashing Wikipedia is stupid... If one finds factually incorrect information, they should log in and rewrite it. That's the whole point of the project. Anyway, I don't know if statistics can be "owned" as such, but I am sure glad that IndyCar will include AAA/USAC/CART/CCWS stats. Sorry, Scott Dixon, but you are not the winningest Indy Car driver, A.J. Foyt is.

Sorry to disagree, but Wikipedia is a very good idea gone very bad in many instances. I have no time to waste on writing something when any half-witted, uneducated fool can come along and change what is correct to what is incorrect. Whatever value Wikipedia may have in some broad, general areas, in many niche areas, such as those related to automobile racing, it tends to be very much hit-and-miss, often becoming "Wrongkipedia" instead. Needless to say, I am scarcely one of its biggest fans and tend to ignore it whenever possible. If nothing else, Wikipedia does tend to validate Shannon's Law, but that is not necessarily grounds for any celebration. While I may be many things, stupid is probably not one of them.

Sorry to disagree onve more, but while A.J. Foyt, Jr. has the most USAC national championship wins and it is also correct that Dixon the most IRL/ICS "IndyCar" wins. These are two entirely different series. While one may certainly combine the various series and play games with the data as many seem inclined to do, that does not change the history of the series.

[garyshell]

Mr. Capps,

You had plenty of time to write up this diatribe here, you could have just as easily posted a copy to Wikipedia. And the reality is you are quibbling semantics with this nonsense. So what if they were all separate series, they were all a continuum of championship open wheel racing in the US. Some of us are much more interested in the history of that continuum than we are in the political machinations of one series versus another.

Gary

[Mark]

I say it's just semantics. By 'owning' the history, in itself doesn't mean a lot, that's for sure. However it enables you to say things like "Driver X has now won the championship 3 times" or "This is the 40th IndyCar race at this venue", even if the championships and races happen to be spread across multiple periods of ownership. You may say that's revisionist history, and you may be right, but it keeps things nice and neat for us simple folk .

And certainly the semantics of CART vs OWRS matters not one bit, as they are a continuation one to the other.

How you now think of races taking place under CART/OWRS and if they count as 'IndyCar' races, is another matter really!

[BDunnell]

Sorry to disagree, but Wikipedia is a very good idea gone very bad in many instances. I have no time to waste on writing something when any half-witted, uneducated fool can come along and change what is correct to what is incorrect.

I couldn't agree more.

[BDunnell]

I say it's just semantics. By 'owning' the history, in itself doesn't mean a lot, that's for sure. However it enables you to say things like "Driver X has now won the championship 3 times" or "This is the 40th IndyCar race at this venue", even if the championships and races happen to be spread across multiple periods of ownership. You may say that's revisionist history, and you may be right, but it keeps things nice and neat for us simple folk .

I understand exactly what you mean, but the retention of a true historical record is very important.

[Dr. Krogshöj]

Sorry to disagree, but Wikipedia is a very good idea gone very bad in many instances. I have no time to waste on writing something when any half-witted, uneducated fool can come along and change what is correct to what is incorrect. Whatever value Wikipedia may have in some broad, general areas, in many niche areas, such as those related to automobile racing, it tends to be very much hit-and-miss, often becoming "Wrongkipedia" instead. Needless to say, I am scarcely one of its biggest fans and tend to ignore it whenever possible. If nothing else, Wikipedia does tend to validate Shannon's Law, but that is not necessarily grounds for any celebration. While I may be many things, stupid is probably not one of them.

Sorry to disagree onve more, but while A.J. Foyt, Jr. has the most USAC national championship wins and it is also correct that Dixon the most IRL/ICS "IndyCar" wins. These are two entirely different series. While one may certainly combine the various series and play games with the data as many seem inclined to do, that does not change the history of the series.

Apologies for using the word stupid, I referred to the verbal abuse and didn't mean it as a personal insult. However, in my experience, more often than not, community control ensures that eventually, the correct informations will end up in most articles. The very reason for most of the wrong articles may be the fact that people who have the knowledge to correct them, restain from editing on the grounds that half-witted, uneducated will change it to bullcrap.

[BDunnell]

Apologies for using the word stupid, I referred to the verbal abuse and didn't mean it as a personal insult. However, in my experience, more often than not, community control ensures that eventually, the correct informations will end up in most articles. The very reason for most of the wrong articles may be the fact that people who have the knowledge to correct them, restain from editing on the grounds that half-witted, uneducated will change it to bullcrap.

But isn't that a very good reason for those with the necessary knowledge not doing so? Personally, I think it is. I think it's better for the latter group to disseminate their knowledge by means that can't be 'amended' in such ways, even if it means the correct information reaches a smaller audience, so as to guarantee that correct information being available in unadulterated form somewhere. Elitist? Possibly, but that doesn't bother me.

[Lousada]

Only ChampCar could ever own its history, no one else....

What happened was that part of the deal, as I understand it, was that the Indy Racing League/IndyCar got the physical records of the series. To some, that the IRL/ICR took possession of the "records" of ChampCar was interpreted as literally the records, the history of ChampCar. This was not the case.

What's your basis for this? You can actually own history as bizarre as that may sound. As far as I understand the IRL bought Champcar, and since Champcar continued out of CART, the IRL now owns the history of both CC and CART. That this is incredibly ironic and historically inaccurate is also a fact.
Another example of this complicated matter is the Team Lotus/Group Lotus saga, where Team owns the F1 records while Group owns everything else.