Best defunct racing series'

[Don Capps]

After reading all the responses here, why do I have the impression that most of today's racing series pale in comparison to many of the defunct series?

I think there's several factors:
(1) Simple rose-tinted nostalgia
(2) Greater variety both of cars and of circuits so at different circuts a different car had the edge
(3) Less high technology meant that the small man had a chance of proving competitive if he got the mixture of partly-understood factors more-or-less right.
(4) Smaller budgets. With less money around teams simply could not afford to explore every technical avenue. Consequently it appears that the larger budget teams didn't enjoy as much of an advantage compared to now. This is a strange one as you'd expect it to work the other way.
(5) Over regulation. The increased amount of regulation and tighter specifications reduce the scope for innovation
(6) Enthusiasm. Drivers appear to be more professional and focussed with hardly anyone claiming to race simply for the fun of it.
(7) Bernie. he has improved the 'show' of F1 and the money the top teams can make. But, to an extent this has been achieved at the expense of the lesser formulas. How many people go to a club event, national event or even the feeder formulae

There is much to commend regarding Duncan's list. Although nostalgia is certainly a factor in all this, that vintage racing is probably one of the few types of automobile racing in the United States that appears to be even relatively healthy must signify something.

In retrospect, it often seems that in spite of themselves and everything else, somehow they managed to find a way to create some very interesting series and racing from the early 1960's until maybe the early 1990's, for the most part, at least in North America.

[BDunnell]

There is much to commend regarding Duncan's list. Although nostalgia is certainly a factor in all this, that vintage racing is probably one of the few types of automobile racing in the United States that appears to be even relatively healthy must signify something.

In retrospect, it often seems that in spite of themselves and everything else, somehow they managed to find a way to create some very interesting series and racing from the early 1960's until maybe the early 1990's, for the most part, at least in North America.

Very true. And nice to see you on here again, Don. What do you think about the 'danger' aspect in all of this, may I ask? I naturally recoil from the notion of being at all exhilarated by the notion of danger in itself as a reason to enjoy motorsport, but I can't help but wonder whether it's somewhere in the background of the factors as to why modern-day motorsport leaves me cold.

[Don Capps]

Stirling Moss, along with more than a few others, have had their say regarding the "danger" aspect in racing, then and now. Personally, I tend to agree with the notion, at least to an extent, although I would suggest that rather than "danger" it is actually "risk" that they really mean. That there is, generally, a lack of dire consequences to an act, intentional or otherwise, would seem to significantly change or alter the very nature of the exercise. It is also the handmaiden of technology, that is, everything is faster and stronger, capable of higher levels of performance. Couple that with the increasingly insular nature of motor sports and, well, nostalgia is not what it used to be simply because "moving forward" does not necessarily equal progress. I have never been one who thought much of the rosy-tinted nostalgia that more often than not in no way reflected the reality of the times, but that memory has morphed into something that satiates the need to justify or rationalize a view or an ideology or whatever -- I will spare you my thoughts regarding how to view this as a cultural historian does. To an extent, nostalgia in the racing sense is often akin to the "Lost Cause" of the former Confederates or the "stabbed-in-the-back" conspiracy that was espoused by some of the Germans after the Great War, which reflected itself as an ideological stance not very different from the American "Lost Cause."

Personally, after following automobile racing for some six decades now, it rarely has much appeal for me any more. The current appeal of Formula 1 baffles me to a large extent given that it is so insular and not unlike 10-meter yacht racing in that only the 0.1% need apply as well as not having much connection with reality (economic and otherwise) or even that much of an entertainment. Like many forms of sport, it is a self-licking ice cream cone. Technology is a major part of the problem, not simply from a Luddite rejection of such things, but rather, I would suggest, that what racers want and spectators want are diametrically opposed, mutually exclusive goals and outcomes. Think about it and then ponder the changes over the past five or four decades across the board.

Currently, I rarely bother to watch F1 simply because I have better things to do on Sunday mornings. Despite my many misgivings about the organization, I do try to catch most of the INDYCAR series events -- when I remember there is a race on; similarly, the various NASCAR series events. While I certainly have grave reservations regarding those running the organization, despite it all, it is the only form of racing in the USA that actually has an audience. The slavish devotion to the International 500 Mile Sweepstakes race has pretty much rendered INDYCAR to the sidelines for eternity. While it will stagger on -- and on and on and on... -- it is second tier at best, and lower second tier at that.

Personally, in their day, I liked Formula A/F5000 and F/Atlantic. I also liked the "big-banger" sports cars, to include the Can-Am and USRRC. Stock car racing in its earlier forms was quite interesting. IMSA managed to get so much "right," GTP was far superior to Group C. Trans Am self-destructed due to the SCCA ossifying and making Colonel Blimp look like a wild-eyed progressive. Say what one will about Big Bill and Little Bill France, John Bishop was the last person to run an actually successful sanctioning body in the USA. As much as USAC tried for years to screw up Champ Car racing -- and finally did, CART was like the Phoenix and even managed to make Ecclestone squirm -- but The Poisoned Dwarf was saved by Tony George and the IMS minions who successfully ensured that that form of racing would collapse into ashes, but without a Phoenix arising from the rubble. Not that I would wish to venture any opinions, of course.

My personal interest for a period in racing is racing in the USA until the end of 1920.

[Starter]

Don makes a ;lot of good points. I agree with much of it. I especially agree with his assessment of the risk factor. I know that risk was one of the things which made my own participation in motorsports different, and more exciting, than other sports I've done. Not that I though I would get hurt or that those around me would be injured, but that the possibility existed made it that much more intense. Let me make it clear that I don't believe for a second that the more dangerous former versions of the sport would fly today. Though the lack of same is one of the reasons for dwindling interest is all motor sports - IMO of course.

[AAReagles]

Well with another European round dispatched off the calendar, would it be premature to add F1 to this topic?... while awaiting the up and coming Formula drONE?
I'll be rooting for Team AMAZON btw.