Printable View
If anything, Danica actually disproves his theory, as she went to Nationwide with plenty of oval experience, but aside from one decent finish, has been pretty poor. Ditto the likes of Sam Hornish, come to think of it. Comes back to requiring relevant oval experience, rather than just any old oval experience. A quick look at IRL history shows that oval experience in and of itself isn't enough for OWR success.Quote:
Originally Posted by beachgirl
There are also the issues of talent and equipment. Danica is limited by the first and Sam was limited by the second.Quote:
Originally Posted by hornet
The problem with all of these "requirements" is past results in one series or type of racing may not translate to another series or type of racing. There are way too many examples of failures with lots of "experience" and successes with limited experience. Talent can often trump experience. But until the driver actually straps in and gives a series a try, there is no sure fire way to predict how they will do.
Every racing series has some licensing procedures and requirements that have evolved over many years to try to weed out drivers who aren't qualified. It isn't a perfect process, but all series do their best.
A front engine car has four tires and a steering wheel.
A rear engine car has four tires and a steering wheel.
It's not really a big transition.
Do you say these things just to get a rise out of people, or are you really this dense? If you don't know how much of a transition it really is, you have obviously never raced either one, or even driven both on the street. Therefore, your premise is totally off the wall and invalid.Quote:
Originally Posted by call_me_andrew
This is the DUMBEST thing you have said yet......Quote:
Originally Posted by call_me_andrew
Your analogy is just like saying the following
Cessna 172 has wings, fuselage, and a flight controls.
Lockheed F-22 has wings fuselage and flight controls.
It's not really a big transition for the 172 pilot to fly the F-22
Some of the greatest Sprint Car drivers have a terrible time trying to adjust their driving styles to work in a rear engine Indycar. Steve Kinser who is one of if not the Greatest sprint car driver tried Indy twice wrecked in practice in 1981 and wrecked during the race in 1997. The best sprint car driver the was able to transition from one to the other was Rich Vogler and even he had a hard time with rear engine cars.
That crack must be real good in Quakertown.....
You've rather undermined your own argument there. You can't claim on the one hand that completely differing machinery isn't a big transition whilst on the other claiming a completely different track type is.Quote:
Originally Posted by call_me_andrew
I notice that on the blog it is Katherine, and not a shortened version of her first name.
Yeah, Steve Kinser won a lot of sprint car races. He beat the likes of Guy Nooneeverheardof, Slowpoke McGhee, and Obscure Driver Jr. Would you like to see the world's tallest midget?
And yes, track is way more important than machinery.
The hole just gets deeper and deeper.Quote:
Originally Posted by call_me_andrew
Gary
I think the link in the signature says it all "arguing around in circles"Quote:
Originally Posted by call_me_andrew
Sooooo. If Jay Springsteen dominated dirt ovals like DuQuoin on 2 wheels, he should have been able to jump in a stock car on the exact same track and run competitively? Or Scott Russell, "Mr Daytona" on a motorcycle, should have been able to do the same in a sports car in the Rolex running the exact same track?
If you claim to be so knowledgeable about driver qualifications, you should know that Kinser was/is able to beat some of the best drivers of his era - many of whom were successful at Indy. He drives a car with four wheels and a steering wheel.
Keep digging that hole.
"Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools talk because they have to say something."
- Plato