From the mind of Bruton Smith

[call_me_andrew]

On his support of green, white, checkered finishes:

“We owe that to those race fans. Race fans – we’ve polled them over the years – they want to see a green-flag finish. Iam a strong advocate of that. We used two of them yesterday … we still had one to go. I am a very strong advocate because this gives those race fans what they paid for and what the richly deserve and that is a finish under green.”

Putting aside who exactly this "we" is, how does anyone "owe" the fans a close finish? Track owners "owe" the fans a place to sit and a place to relieve themselves. NASCAR "owes" the fans impartiality. But the quality of racing is really up to the drivers.

When I buy tickets to a baseball game, the home team doesn't "owe" me a victory; they "owe" me 9 innings of hard work. I may not enjoy the outcome of the game, but it's fine as long as I enjoy how "we" got to the outcome.

[71Fan]

Smith has probably always felt that it was track owner/promotor who owed the fans a good race *along* with the sanctioning body. But I imagine that he thinks the promotor is more indebted to the fans in the seats than whatever series is racing on his tracks.

The guy has built an empire in spite of NASCAR's bumbling.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Smith has probably always felt that it was track owner/promotor who owed the fans a good race *along* with the sanctioning body. But I imagine that he thinks the promotor is more indebted to the fans in the seats than whatever series is racing on his tracks.

The guy has built an empire in spite of NASCAR's bumbling.

NASCAR's bumbling built Bruton's empire. Without NASCAR, he doens't build those palaces on Indycar. Give your head a shake....

Smith is for the show, but the fan in me doesn't like the G-W-C finish. It is like the shoot out in hockey, an artificial ending to ensure a finish the "fan" would like...but most fans would just as soon let things run their course.

No race is ever the actual distance any more, it seems we run 20 laps of stupidity afterwards. Kinda puts any effort on fuel strategy and takes it out of the equation. Winning a race on a smart fuel strategy isn't a show tho..and a contrived wreck fest IS.

It's ok...I can stop watching NASCAR soon.....they are reaching out and showing me they are all about the stupidity, and not about putting on a competition....

[slorydn1]

Here's my unwanted take on all things "contrived".

I actually understand where Nascar and Bruton Smith are coming from.Doesn't mean I agree with them,but I do understand it.

Which would you rather see? An announcer screaming "Gordon got LOOSE IT's HARVICK, HARVICK BY INCHES (for a.006 finish) or Sterling Marlin winning a race at Rockingham by riding around the last 6 laps under caution? Add your favorite driver after the word "IT's" and all of us would rather see the first finish over the second. That said, what made a finish like that so special? Forget the fact of who it was and the circumstances around why he was even driving that car. In fact, go to the same race the year before when the MAN himself was still in the car and the close finish Dale Sr had with Labonte. Or Craven V Busch at Darlington. What made those finishes special is that those races built themselves to that point , going for 400 or 500 miles and just happened to end up in that manner. The individual stories of that particular day wove themselves together to end up the way they did. Any of the close finishes created by the GWC rule, and yes, to include my drivers Daytona 500 win, feel fake to me somehow. It still feels special to me, and maybe Harvick1 or Willracefan, but most people want to put an * next to his win. If he had won in the same manner with the big wreck after they had been racing all day there would still be people lamenting the fact that Mark Martin came so close, but we'd all be in agreement that it was a great finish.

Nascar wanted to try to catch that lightning in a bottle,and to try to keep the fans in Talladega from throwing objects on the track because another wreckfest ended under caution. It didn't work. Yeah, we've had some real close finishes, but have had several drivers have great days ruined by wrecks AFTER the scheduled distance,and that just sticks in my craw.

Now, for the chase, which really is just a GWC on steroids.

How many here were actually following Nascar in 1992? I was, sort of. Earnhardt was coming off back to back championships in 90 and 91,but was having a really crappy year in 92, a lot of that fueled by the fact that Earnhardt's "Chad Knaus", Kirk Shelmerdine, was already looking elsewhere, wanting to hang up his CC hat to go into team ownership. Anyway, going into the final race at Atlanta, there were as many as 5 drivers with an outside "shot" at winning the Championship. The odds on favorite, Davey Allison wrecked about halfway through the race (I can still hear BP exclaim "ITS OVER" for Allison). Anyway, Bill Elliot and Alan Kulwicki raced hard and traded the lead several times over thrugjout the race. Bill Elliot ended up winning the race. The points were tallied and although Bill won the race and led 102 laps scoring 180 points, Kulwicki finished second and led 103 laps and scored 180 points and Kulwicki won the championship by just 10 points over the course of an ENTIRE SEASON. 10 POINTS!!!!! That's staying out just to lead a lap instead of pitting with the leaders just twice during the season during a day you might not be running so well!

Just 11 years later the MEDIA started banging the 10 point drum when Matt Kenseth won only 1 race and ran away with the 2003 Championship. They conviently forgot that just 1 year earlier the championship battle went down to the last race of the season between TStew and Mark Martin. Some years are like that, some aren't. It comes with the territory, I guess.

Yes the chase has added exitement to years when 1 driver may have run away with it, but it has also taken the championship away from a driver that deserved to win it by putting together an entire season,and handing it to the guy who can be hottest over the last 10 races....Thereby making it fake, and an * should be placed there as well....

SO,to sum it up,yes, I as a fan want exitement at the end of a race or season. But I want it to naturally end up that way, not be scripted that way,and I have a feeling most here would agree with me on that.We don't want to be bored, but we don't want written endings either.

[damg75]

Here's my unwanted take on all things "contrived".

I actually understand where Nascar and Bruton Smith are coming from.Doesn't mean I agree with them,but I do understand it.

Which would you rather see? An announcer screaming "Gordon got LOOSE IT's HARVICK, HARVICK BY INCHES (for a.006 finish) or Sterling Marlin winning a race at Rockingham by riding around the last 6 laps under caution? Add your favorite driver after the word "IT's" and all of us would rather see the first finish over the second. That said, what made a finish like that so special? Forget the fact of who it was and the circumstances around why he was even driving that car. In fact, go to the same race the year before when the MAN himself was still in the car and the close finish Dale Sr had with Labonte. Or Craven V Busch at Darlington. What made those finishes special is that those races built themselves to that point , going for 400 or 500 miles and just happened to end up in that manner. The individual stories of that particular day wove themselves together to end up the way they did. Any of the close finishes created by the GWC rule, and yes, to include my drivers Daytona 500 win, feel fake to me somehow. It still feels special to me, and maybe Harvick1 or Willracefan, but most people want to put an * next to his win. If he had won in the same manner with the big wreck after they had been racing all day there would still be people lamenting the fact that Mark Martin came so close, but we'd all be in agreement that it was a great finish.

Nascar wanted to try to catch that lightning in a bottle,and to try to keep the fans in Talladega from throwing objects on the track because another wreckfest ended under caution. It didn't work. Yeah, we've had some real close finishes, but have had several drivers have great days ruined by wrecks AFTER the scheduled distance,and that just sticks in my craw.

Now, for the chase, which really is just a GWC on steroids.

How many here were actually following Nascar in 1992? I was, sort of. Earnhardt was coming off back to back championships in 90 and 91,but was having a really crappy year in 92, a lot of that fueled by the fact that Earnhardt's "Chad Knaus", Kirk Shelmerdine, was already looking elsewhere, wanting to hang up his CC hat to go into team ownership. Anyway, going into the final race at Atlanta, there were as many as 5 drivers with an outside "shot" at winning the Championship. The odds on favorite, Davey Allison wrecked about halfway through the race (I can still hear BP exclaim "ITS OVER" for Allison). Anyway, Bill Elliot and Alan Kulwicki raced hard and traded the lead several times over thrugjout the race. Bill Elliot ended up winning the race. The points were tallied and although Bill won the race and led 102 laps scoring 180 points, Kulwicki finished second and led 103 laps and scored 180 points and Kulwicki won the championship by just 10 points over the course of an ENTIRE SEASON. 10 POINTS!!!!! That's staying out just to lead a lap instead of pitting with the leaders just twice during the season during a day you might not be running so well!

Just 11 years later the MEDIA started banging the 10 point drum when Matt Kenseth won only 1 race and ran away with the 2003 Championship. They conviently forgot that just 1 year earlier the championship battle went down to the last race of the season between TStew and Mark Martin. Some years are like that, some aren't. It comes with the territory, I guess.

Yes the chase has added exitement to years when 1 driver may have run away with it, but it has also taken the championship away from a driver that deserved to win it by putting together an entire season,and handing it to the guy who can be hottest over the last 10 races....Thereby making it fake, and an * should be placed there as well....

SO,to sum it up,yes, I as a fan want exitement at the end of a race or season. But I want it to naturally end up that way, not be scripted that way,and I have a feeling most here would agree with me on that.We don't want to be bored, but we don't want written endings either.
Couldn't have been said any better. :s mokin:

[call_me_andrew]

Couldn't have been said any better. :s mokin:

I would have added that the 1959 Daytona 500 ended with a photo finish after being caution free for 500 miles.

[71Fan]

It would depend on whether or not either finished could construed as being contrived.

I favor races that end under racing circumstances, so imo the fix is to red flag rather yellow flag for wrecks/debris, or simply not count laps under yellow. While I agree that finishing under green is the way to go, I don't agree that the GWC is the way to achieve it.

[Mark in Oshawa]

The GWC is contrived. It contravenes the spirit of the race and how it should end up. If a race is 500 miles, it should end right there, yellow or not.

As to your excellent argument Slorydn, I will disagree with you on the chase. I agree the chase in 92 was a classic, but we had a lot of runaways too. More than enough. The Chase has evolved in how drivers tackle it, but if you do the points under the old Winston Cup system or the Chase, the results come out pretty much right on. The guys who are really good in the last 10 in the chase usually were good before. Has an eleven seed in the chase won? No...but at least now he has a shot, the same way a 15 seed in the NCAA championship has no business playing for the championship but makes the Final Four.

So I am in favour of the Chase. I think it does what it was designed to do. The GWC? It is too artificial. I get why NASCAR thinks they had to do it, but I notice they tear up a lot of race cars for no effect with these finishes. We usually have 3 of them and 20 extra laps, and the dominent car all day usually wins.....so I don't see the point.

[71Fan]

Ahhh yes....the Chase....definately good for business. Good for racing? Yea, that too. Cause it's good for business. Do *I* like it? Nope, sure don't. Simply because it changes the way teams race.

My personal opinion on who should be the champ? Simple. 43 points for the winner, 42 for 2nd, 41 for 3rd, and so on down the line. But that's just me.

And as always, your opinions and mileage may vary....wouldn't be any fun if they didn't :)

[call_me_andrew]

My personal opinion on who should be the champ? Simple. 43 points for the winner, 42 for 2nd, 41 for 3rd, and so on down the line. But that's just me.

And as always, your opinions and mileage may vary....wouldn't be any fun if they didn't :)

So to clarify, you think the second place finisher deserves 97.6% of the winner's points?

[71Fan]

yea, that's about it. I'm one of those Keep It Simple Stupid types. I am especially disheartened with the bonus point structure. Just don't think there should be any.

So let's look at bonus points......

Stay out under caution to lead a lap and get bonus points for it? That's a joke folks. Rush to the front on a short run then fade away? What does that prove?

Most laps led? Shuckems, there's only one lap that counts.

Winning? That I could live with, but it would complicate things. And I'm just not in to a complicated system

[slorydn1]

yea, that's about it. I'm one of those Keep It Simple Stupid types. I am especially disheartened with the bonus point structure. Just don't think there should be any.

So let's look at bonus points......

Stay out under caution to lead a lap and get bonus points for it? That's a joke folks. Rush to the front on a short run then fade away? What does that prove?

Most laps led? Shuckems, there's only one lap that counts.

Winning? That I could live with, but it would complicate things. And I'm just not in to a complicated system

Normally, I'm Like you, I'd like to keep things simple. BUT, the more complicated the points system is, the more the MEDIA has to talk about, and the more the media has to talk about, the more the sport gets covered...

And the more the sport gets covered.....well you can see where I am going with that....

SEE ALSO: The BCS in college football......

[Mark in Oshawa]

So to clarify, you think the second place finisher deserves 97.6% of the winner's points?

Isn't that the way the old Winston Cup points system worked? It isn't far off that now....the numbers change but that is essentially the percentages a system like 71 fan has advocated.

People who whine about the chase should really sit with a calculator and figure out all the permuations and figure out from race seasons past before the chase and come to the same conclusion the late David Poole did: A good race driver in the old system would win in the NEW system more often than not. If ANYTHING, it is HARDER to win a championship in the new system, and while there is this fiction teams don't try before Richmond after Labor Day, if that is the case, explain the run Jimmie Johnson has had. You don't see he and Chad stroking it.....guys race to win if possible every week.

The show is the thing in NASCAR for sure, and for me, the Chase is something I didn't want to like for many of the same reasons, but when I read a lot of the pro's and cons, I realized the pro's were a lot more rational and logical for a better season...

[Mark in Oshawa]

yea, that's about it. I'm one of those Keep It Simple Stupid types. I am especially disheartened with the bonus point structure. Just don't think there should be any.

So let's look at bonus points......

Stay out under caution to lead a lap and get bonus points for it? That's a joke folks. Rush to the front on a short run then fade away? What does that prove?

Most laps led? Shuckems, there's only one lap that counts.

Winning? That I could live with, but it would complicate things. And I'm just not in to a complicated system

5 points for leading? Always been part of the deal in the last 20 years. They used to give out points for leading at halfway..a totally stupid idea.

so leading a lap, and leading the most leaps isn't worthy of bonus points? Gee...the winner gets 180 for winning plus 10 bonus points if he makes the chase. So if he gets 5 free ones in a race, and he needs 3400 or so to make the chase, is that 5 a big deal? Really? When everyone who is also gunning for that chase is getting 5 most races? Lets face it, the bonus points makes sure in a 500 mile race guys have an incentive to RACE....which the last time I looked was the major complaint many people have had; that guys don't race hard the whole distance. They may not, but bonus points ensure they keep gunning for the lead on and off until they get them.

[call_me_andrew]

Isn't that the way the old Winston Cup points system worked? It isn't far off that now....the numbers change but that is essentially the percentages a system like 71 fan has advocated.

Under the system you refer to, a second place finisher who lead the most laps will have 100% of the winner's points.

[slorydn1]

5 points for leading? Always been part of the deal in the last 20 years. They used to give out points for leading at halfway..a totally stupid idea.



I knew they used to pay the leader at halfway $10k bonus if he also won the race but I never heard of them paying points for it....doesn't mean they didn't, I just never heard of it.

Ya know, traditions die hard.To this day, the Chief Scorer calls the flag stand on the radio when the leader crosses the line on the lap before halfway and tells him "Scoring stand to the Starter, half-way next time by...29" (the number being the the car number of the leader,and since it's MY post the 29 would be leading :p : ) and the flagman displays the green and checkered flags folded up and crossed to the cars as they cross...

[call_me_andrew]

Yeah, they didn't pay points for leading at halfway. But there was a cash bonus for leading at halfway and winning the race; the exact amount would double every time the halfway leader didn't win. The cash bonus later shifted to whoever lead the most laps and then TV commentators stop mentioning it.

I know this was sponsored by Unocal 76. I don't know if it was eliminated when Sunoco became the official fuel supplier.

[71Fan]

slorydn1.....never think for a moment that what you post is unwanted....the world be a very boring place without opposing views.

And, let me say that I do like the excitement The Chase brings. Just don't think it is currently the way to go. Personally, I would make it more of a tourney style last man standing thing. The lowest finishing Chaser is eliminated in every race until there are just two left for the final at Homestead.

Or better yet, how about double elimination match races? Now that would be fun.

But what I really don't like about it is that there are other cars involved. How about a separate sprint race just for chasers at the final tracks with the last man standing format?

Thing is, there are gazillion different ways they could go about it. I guess they're all just lucky I don't make the rules :-)

[slorydn1]

Yeah, they didn't pay points for leading at halfway. But there was a cash bonus for leading at halfway and winning the race; the exact amount would double every time the halfway leader didn't win. The cash bonus later shifted to whoever lead the most laps and then TV commentators stop mentioning it.

I know this was sponsored by Unocal 76. I don't know if it was eliminated when Sunoco became the official fuel supplier.


Your right, :up: I forgot about the "roll over money" if the driver didn't win the race.

I wanna say it stopped a couple of years before 76 left.......right around 2001 I think

[71Fan]

Yea, I remember that kinda sorta....everything with my memory is kinda sorta.....Wasn't it done with Poles/Winners also?

[Mark in Oshawa]

....the world be a very boring place without opposing views.:-)

VERY true, but it can be frustrating!!



....And, let me say that I do like the excitement The Chase brings. Just don't think it is currently the way to go. Personally, I would make it more of a tourney style last man standing thing. The lowest finishing Chaser is eliminated in every race until there are just two left for the final at Homestead.

Last man every race eliminated? You watch the standings and you have that unofficially almost now. By the last race, you have maybe 2 guys within a sniff of the leader, but one usually is it.

The Chase works when you conteplate teams being 400 points up at years end as often as not under the old system.



....Or better yet, how about double elimination match races? Now that would be fun.

No....



....But what I really don't like about it is that there are other cars involved. How about a separate sprint race just for chasers at the final tracks with the last man standing format?

You cant do that, no one is going to watch a 12 car race separate from the others. THe point is, if you suck one week, where the non chase guys have better days, than you should be given that much respect/disrespect in the points. NASCAR is all about 43 guys out there trying to win every race, regardless of the chase.



....Thing is, there are gazillion different ways they could go about it. I guess they're all just lucky I don't make the rules.

That holds true for a lot of us my friend....

[slorydn1]

The GWC is contrived. It contravenes the spirit of the race and how it should end up. If a race is 500 miles, it should end right there, yellow or not.

As to your excellent argument Slorydn, I will disagree with you on the chase. I agree the chase in 92 was a classic, but we had a lot of runaways too. More than enough. The Chase has evolved in how drivers tackle it, but if you do the points under the old Winston Cup system or the Chase, the results come out pretty much right on. The guys who are really good in the last 10 in the chase usually were good before. Has an eleven seed in the chase won? No...but at least now he has a shot, the same way a 15 seed in the NCAA championship has no business playing for the championship but makes the Final Four.

So I am in favour of the Chase. I think it does what it was designed to do. The GWC? It is too artificial. I get why NASCAR thinks they had to do it, but I notice they tear up a lot of race cars for no effect with these finishes. We usually have 3 of them and 20 extra laps, and the dominent car all day usually wins.....so I don't see the point.

Good point. I have always maintained that the chase does what it was designed to do (the fact that the 2009 standings were actually CLOSER
using the season long standings rather than the chase points notwithstanding).

I guess what I am stating, or would it be more proper for me to say "asking",
Is this sort of "playoff" system right for auto racing?

To use your own stick and ball analogy:

Teams play "x" number of games a year, all against other teams, one at a time, and amass a Won-Loss record over the course the season. In pro sports, the teams with the best Won-Loss records win their divisions, and few (between 1 and 3 depending on the sport) get in as wild cards for their confrence (or League in baseball). In college sports, the all mighty all knowing selection comittee's get tgether and pick who fills what brackets, etc....after that the concept is the same, team B goes to play team A and they fight it out (single elimination in football, 5 to 7 game series in the others) and may the best team win. Loser goes home, fires the coach, gets rid of expensive do nothing players and reloads for next year.

In Auto racing, doesn't matter if its F1, Indy Car, NASCAR, World of Outlaws, they go as a TOUR, from venue A, to Venue B, same players week in and week out (in the top 35, anyway, in Nascar's case), and amass points for how they do each and every week, over the course of an entire season. If one guy runs away with it I don't blame the sport, I blame the 42 other teams for not stepping up their game.

Yet, someone thought it would be a really great idea to basicly wipe out the results of the first 26 races and reset the points after the 2nd richmond race, and have found that they have had to adjust TWICE the way they do that already just since 2004 (by expanding from 10 to 12, then by changing the seeding from points to wins).

I bring it up because it used to be a season in racing wasn't like a season in stick and ball sports and was never meant to be. A season in racing was just one big race in and of itself, from the green flag at Daytona to the checkered flag at Homestead-Miami, and the Chase has ruined that for me. Now I really don't care about the champinship at all anymore,its all about the race at hand,whether that be the Daytona 500 or the Dirtbag Tampons 350k, its all about the trophy for that race for me, the season no longer exists for me anymore.

Enuff of that tho.....Bristol is coming up, time for some good old beatin and banging....Food City 500 is less than a week away!!!! :D

[71Fan]

Remember peeps, it's takes like a 180 or so baseball games to figure out the Yankees have the best team money can buy.

[Mark in Oshawa]

See Slorydn...I hear what you are saying, but here is the reality: No one CARED about the other guys in 10th, 14th, or even 5th. By the time fall came, we watched the races, but unless there was a close race for the championship, no one tuned into see that change. No one was excited. 1992 was the exception. Most years, the championship was pretty much iced by September's end. Media were turning away from NASCAR in the fall. Sponsors looked at the teams in 10th and wondered why they were not getting more bang for their buck. The chase solves all those issues.

So, where you need to wrap your head around things is the reality that it gives new life for teams that are good but not leading. The Kasey Kahne's and Clint Bowyer's may not lead the point at any point all year, but they good. Rip off 5 wins in a row and drive well in the other 5 and they can win a championship. Would Kasey or Clint's fans be disappointed that the Chase doesn't mean what it did? You kidding? It also means Johnson has to beat 11 other guys for that championship, not just 2 or 3 in the last weeks. Yet he still does.

I don't follow the sport more or less, but you and I are NOT who the Chase was designed for. The casual fan is tuning in more to see how this turns out. Ratings were up last year for those races. They were finding in the past the ratings for the fall races was WORSE before the chase. Someone is tuning in...

IN the real world, where casual fans make the needle move, the Chase works. Us Purists will tune in anyhow....

[71Fan]

I liken it to Boise State....might not be the best team in the nation but they sure get a lot of money from the airplay....and airplay is what the sponsors want.