New Start N Park Rule

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 71Fan

Yea.....If only they would play by rules, none of this would've ever happened. Oh yea, my rules are simple.


1. Run what ya brung. (as long as your car passes a safety inspection)
2. Go fast or go home.
3. If you are lapped, you re-start in the back.
4. No yellow flag pit stops.
5. Races are for the designated distance. No exceptions.
6. Seatbelts, helmets, HANS Devices, all other designated safety devices, and a spotter are mandatory.
7. There will be no stopping of races due to rain or darkness. (see rule #5)
8. Speeding on Pit Road will be a 2 lap penalty.
9. Intentionally hitting another car on Pit Road will result in a last place finish and a 1 race suspension.
10. All driver disputes will be settled with 16 ounce gloves and headgear.

Yup, think that about covers it.....Let's go racin' boys!

---

Works for me :up: except rule 7....oval racing in the rain wouldn't be much fun

Relative NASCAR newbie here, been watching on-and-off for a few years due to intermittent terrestrial TV coverage in the UK.

I'm with Mark on this one, although I do completely see the point of those that disagree.

However, as someone who's watched Formula 1 narrowly avoid disaster many times in recent years I think the key is this: the health of your series isn't determined by who's at the front, but who's at the back. F1 unwisely cut most of the small teams out in the early-mid Nineties by instigating a 107% qualifying rule to get on the grid, which culled the field from 40 cars trying to qualify to race in 1991 to twenty cars just five years later. But then with 20 cars on the grid, you start to find that manufacturer or big-spending teams are pretty near the back or indeed at the back - and they don't like that as its a major embarrassment. If there's a Minardi or someone behind you, that's not so bad. With the current downturn the manufacturers have bailed, so this year's move to help new independent teams in HAD to be done, otherwise F1 would've had a 14-car grid or something which is perilously close to death-time for any racing series. Small teams should be at the back - if big ones are you're very close to disaster.

The same must be true of NASCAR in terms of who's at the back, even though the grid size is much healthier. If well-funded teams are sitting at the back of a (reduced) 35 car field, sponsors might bail out. With (say) eight admittedly underfunded efforts behind, that's less of a problem. And they can make the jump out into full running - surely it brought a smile to see Dave Blaney run the full race this time?

It's certainly not ideal for them to not be able to afford to run the full show, but they're hardly getting in the way and these are hard times for everyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JasonD

So coming in first or last results in a $30,000 bill? Umm ya that makes a lot of sense.

---

You figure it out, yes that is a number that likely makes sense. Everyone has to bring their car in a hauler, and bring enough spares to service it. Everyone HAS to have a pit crew, so you are paying to bring 6 over the wall guys, plus a couple behind the wall, plus your crew chief and car chief. You might have more but that is bare minimum. You have to lease a minimum amount of tires, and you have to have the equipment to show up and a pit suite. If you start actually racing, then the cost goes up with wear and tear, plus tires and gas. So if you have a sponsor, you make laps and try to win if you have everything going your way. If you had no sponsor, you lose money if you race past the first pit stop. If NASCAR does what is proposed, they just cost these teams MORE money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by patnicholls

Relative NASCAR newbie here, been watching on-and-off for a few years due to intermittent terrestrial TV coverage in the UK.

I'm with Mark on this one, although I do completely see the point of those that disagree.

However, as someone who's watched Formula 1 narrowly avoid disaster many times in recent years I think the key is this: the health of your series isn't determined by who's at the front, but who's at the back. F1 unwisely cut most of the small teams out in the early-mid Nineties by instigating a 107% qualifying rule to get on the grid, which culled the field from 40 cars trying to qualify to race in 1991 to twenty cars just five years later. But then with 20 cars on the grid, you start to find that manufacturer or big-spending teams are pretty near the back or indeed at the back - and they don't like that as its a major embarrassment. If there's a Minardi or someone behind you, that's not so bad. With the current downturn the manufacturers have bailed, so this year's move to help new independent teams in HAD to be done, otherwise F1 would've had a 14-car grid or something which is perilously close to death-time for any racing series. Small teams should be at the back - if big ones are you're very close to disaster.

The same must be true of NASCAR in terms of who's at the back, even though the grid size is much healthier. If well-funded teams are sitting at the back of a (reduced) 35 car field, sponsors might bail out. With (say) eight admittedly underfunded efforts behind, that's less of a problem. And they can make the jump out into full running - surely it brought a smile to see Dave Blaney run the full race this time?

It's certainly not ideal for them to not be able to afford to run the full show, but they're hardly getting in the way and these are hard times for everyone.

---

I think the nature of NASCAR will dictate someone will show up but I suspect many teams will not make the bell every race now....

I just fail to see why they are doing what they doing at this point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

I just fail to see why they are doing what they doing at this point.

---

Maybe they are tired of paying these teams good money each week, to show up and not race?

This is supposed to be a top rung, professional racing series. I don't blame them for wanting 43 cars in their races every week, who are there to actually RACE.

Now do they have 43 cars that can show up and financially make it work? I guess, we'll see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by patnicholls

Relative NASCAR newbie here, been watching on-and-off for a few years due to intermittent terrestrial TV coverage in the UK.

I'm with Mark on this one, although I do completely see the point of those that disagree.

However, as someone who's watched Formula 1 narrowly avoid disaster many times in recent years I think the key is this: the health of your series isn't determined by who's at the front, but who's at the back. F1 unwisely cut most of the small teams out in the early-mid Nineties by instigating a 107% qualifying rule to get on the grid, which culled the field from 40 cars trying to qualify to race in 1991 to twenty cars just five years later. But then with 20 cars on the grid, you start to find that manufacturer or big-spending teams are pretty near the back or indeed at the back - and they don't like that as its a major embarrassment. If there's a Minardi or someone behind you, that's not so bad. With the current downturn the manufacturers have bailed, so this year's move to help new independent teams in HAD to be done, otherwise F1 would've had a 14-car grid or something which is perilously close to death-time for any racing series. Small teams should be at the back - if big ones are you're very close to disaster.

The same must be true of NASCAR in terms of who's at the back, even though the grid size is much healthier. If well-funded teams are sitting at the back of a (reduced) 35 car field, sponsors might bail out. With (say) eight admittedly underfunded efforts behind, that's less of a problem. And they can make the jump out into full running - surely it brought a smile to see Dave Blaney run the full race this time?

It's certainly not ideal for them to not be able to afford to run the full show, but they're hardly getting in the way and these are hard times for everyone.

---

You have a very valid point. I never quite thought of it that way, however, I don't really believe its quite the same as the 107% rule in F1. Nascar isn't trying to cull out the under-performing teams, as much as it is trying to curb the rash of teams who show up and put some kind of all out qually set up in the car, make the race, then park it 10 laps into the race. Sometimes,they even out qualify (and therefore send home) a team that is better funded and would have run the whole race, and who is in it for the long haul. It would be like USF1 actually showing up to Bahrain (a big laugher there) going fast enough to make the show (if F1 had knock out quals instead of guaranteed spots) and a Force India car had to go home, then Windsor keys up the radio and tells the driver to park it.

In the past,since that car was finishing last,they would just leave the track and go home before the race is over with no post race inspection. What would stop one of them from bringing an oversize motor,for instance? I think Dave Blaney's Q-lap at California really raised some suspicions in Nascar's tech dept. I mean here is a car that can barely get out of its own way qualifying in the top 10, out qualifying Kevin Harvick, Jimmie Johnson, Mark Martin, and Kyle Busch, on a highspeed, high downforce track like Cali (?) That would be like someone taking a mindardi and out pacing Shumacher, Alonzo and Raikkonen back in the day. Things that make ya go hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.....

Still. it doesn't take a tear-down to determine cubic inches or compression ratios. And other than cubic inches and compression ratio what else is there? A lighter piston or rod? Shucks, I doubt they could get the dern things any lighter than they already are.

As for somebody suddenly turning a hotter lap than usual, throw minimum weight oils and greases at a car and full seconds being taken off a lap time imo would not be out of the question.

No peeps, this has nothing to do at all with all they guys at the back getting a fair shake. This has to do with NASCAR (one) not wanting to pay start n parkers and (two) NASCAR not wanting to look like some kind of fool for doing so.

But again, this is also going to hurt those teams that are there to race, Even if it's only for 38th place because if something goes wrong and they finish last, they might not have the money to continue

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slorydn1

In the past,since that car was finishing last,they would just leave the track and go home before the race is over with no post race inspection. What would stop one of them from bringing an oversize motor,for instance? I think Dave Blaney's Q-lap at California really raised some suspicions in Nascar's tech dept. I mean here is a car that can barely get out of its own way qualifying in the top 10, out qualifying Kevin Harvick, Jimmie Johnson, Mark Martin, and Kyle Busch, on a highspeed, high downforce track like Cali (?) That would be like someone taking a mindardi and out pacing Shumacher, Alonzo and Raikkonen back in the day. Things that make ya go hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.....

---

UK viewers don't have the luxury of quali coverage but from memory I think Blaney was also well up in qualifying at one of the short tracks last year (maybe Bristol? or Martinsville) - something like 4th in the starting lineup and then basically got out of the way cos he knew he'd be s&p-ing although didn't elect to start from the back. I guess it's an equivalent of F1 teams (sorry to draw a parallel again) who throw it all into a quali strategy to get some TV time knowing that they'll fall back during the race, or indeed teams running very light through winter testing to try and get sponsorship by posting amazing times. Obviously the difference being that testing is one thing and the races themselves are quite different...

Am I right in thinking that the number of s&p-ers we're dealing with this year is either four or five at present (Said, Almirola, McDowell, Nemechek, and Blaney who's run one and s&p-ed one)?

Back in the day, Nascar always had "strokers" who would ride around and try to not tear up their car and bring home a check(JD McDuffie, Buddy Arrington, Jimmy Means). I don't see it as that much different, but what has changed is the way Nascar structures their purses. Purses today are much flatter in terms of payout.

Look at these examples from 1982: (picking drivers who were on the same type of "plan"

Rockingham II

Lake Speed 32nd ............$1700
Buddy Arrington 23rd .......$2800 64% increase

Daytona 500

Ricky Rudd 35th..........$6050
Dave Marcis 24th........$8905 47% increase

and from 2009:

Bristol I

Joe Nemechek 41st $83,475
David Ragan 27th $96,450 15% increase

Daytona 500

Jeremy Mayfield 40th $265,238
Terry Labonte 24th $273,963 3% increase

I am wondering if the flattening of the purses coupled with the increased reliability of the cars today make it not worth the risk to run all day for these backmarker teams for whatever few positions they might be able to pick up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by patnicholls

UK viewers don't have the luxury of quali coverage but from memory I think Blaney was also well up in qualifying at one of the short tracks last year (maybe Bristol? or Martinsville) - something like 4th in the starting lineup and then basically got out of the way cos he knew he'd be s&p-ing although didn't elect to start from the back. I guess it's an equivalent of F1 teams (sorry to draw a parallel again) who throw it all into a quali strategy to get some TV time knowing that they'll fall back during the race, or indeed teams running very light through winter testing to try and get sponsorship by posting amazing times. Obviously the difference being that testing is one thing and the races themselves are quite different...

Am I right in thinking that the number of s&p-ers we're dealing with this year is either four or five at present (Said, Almirola, McDowell, Nemechek, and Blaney who's run one and s&p-ed one)?

---

Short tracks like Bristol and Martinsville are a different animal, the driver skill really comes to the front at those tracks because aero really doesn't mean much.Blaney is a very good driver who cant seem to catch a break in his career and latch on long term with a good team. So quite often a back marker team will qualify well at those venue's. You can add 3 of the 4 restrictor plate races to that mix as they are impound races. For those that are not familiar with the impound rules, you pretty much qualify what your gonna race (exactly like f1 actually). So the top-35 teams that are locked in don't put any kind of special qualifying setups or oils or anything like that because they are locked in the show, and it really doesn't matter where you start a plate race, you'll be at the front within 10 laps with enough friends to push you. The Go or Go Homers will add the lightweight oil, put in a qualifying gear, even resort to an old fashioned qualifying motor that wouldn't last a 500 mile race. It is not uncommon for some of those guys to qualify in the top 10 there (Boris Said ALMOST sat on the pole the Coke Zero 400 back in 2007, had it not rained keeping the last 4 cars from setting a time which scrubbed qualifying, and Said went from the Pole to the truck as he was sent home with no owner points).

But the 1.5-2.5 mile high speed, high downforce tracks require the best of everything to run and stay at the front,and when a team like Blaney's Q's in the top 10, eyebrows are raised. Turns out his car was legal, good on them.

71 Fan was correct. They have ways of determining the CID of the engine without having to completely tearing it down, but the only way to determine if every part of that engine is legal is to tear it down and look at every part. I would like to see nascar pay the $$$ to rebuild the engine's they tear down, but that's never going to happen.

As for your other question about the S & P's look at the Cup Series points standings thru Vegas....
http://racing-reference.info/yeardet?yr=2010&series=W

Just eye balling it, it looks like the drivers in positions 36 -42 are start and parkers. Michael Waltrip is retiring and will only run at most 1 other race this year, Bill Elliot is part time with 21 Wood Bros team (they don't attempt all the races, so that they have the money to RACE in the one's they do attempt), and the Bottom 3 have missed races due to S & P's outqualifying them, they would have run the whole race if they had made it.

Sorry I got so long winded, I hope it helped :D