NASCAR contemplates multiple G-W-C finishes

http://www.nascar.com/2010/news/head...red/index.html

What does everyone think about this?

"Poston said it was too early to know if a set number of attempts would be mandated, but his opinion was it would be a variable number based on the race directors' discretion.
"[The number of attempts] will likely be in the judgment of the tower, in terms of what's happening and what the circumstances are," Poston said. "We have it currently in other series that it's multiple attempts so I doubt that it would have to be necessary to nail down that it would be X number for any one race because that may not be the logical conclusion, depending on what's happening."

HMMM...discuss

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by damg75

http://www.nascar.com/2010/news/head...red/index.html

What does everyone think about this?

"Poston said it was too early to know if a set number of attempts would be mandated, but his opinion was it would be a variable number based on the race directors' discretion.
"[The number of attempts] will likely be in the judgment of the tower, in terms of what's happening and what the circumstances are," Poston said. "We have it currently in other series that it's multiple attempts so I doubt that it would have to be necessary to nail down that it would be X number for any one race because that may not be the logical conclusion, depending on what's happening."

HMMM...discuss

---

I'd be all over it EXCEPT for what Poston stated. If it truly is left up to the "race director's discretion" then that would be yet another tool for nascrap to "manage the outcome" of races. SO, what your telling me is, if Jimmie Johnson is in the lead we'll call it good now, but if Harvick or Kyle Busch is in the lead then its gonna be "lets have another go at it." AT least, thats what the fans of the driver who gets screwed that week is going to say.

This would be the absolutely the WORST thing Nascar can do for its already weak credibility, IMHO

:beer:

I firmly believe Nascar is always too fast to pull the trigger on the yellow.

I believe that they should just not count caution laps inside 20 laps-50 laps depending on the track

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by harvick#1

I firmly believe Nascar is always too fast to pull the trigger on the yellow.

I believe that they should just not count caution laps inside 20 laps-50 laps depending on the track

---

Although I do agree that Nascar is sometimes a little quick to "PUT IT OUT" as David Hoots says when he calls for the yellow on the radio, especially when one of the Fav's is about to get lapped, I cant agree with caution laps not counting. That would absolutely wreak havoc on fuel strategery and the like. Just my two cents worth, anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slorydn1

I'd be all over it EXCEPT for what Poston stated. If it truly is left up to the "race director's discretion" then that would be yet another tool for nascrap to "manage the outcome" of races. SO, what your telling me is, if Jimmie Johnson is in the lead we'll call it good now, but if Harvick or Kyle Busch is in the lead then its gonna be "lets have another go at it." AT least, thats what the fans of the driver who gets screwed that week is going to say.

This would be the absolutely the WORST thing Nascar can do for its already weak credibility, IMHO

:beer:

---

Highlighted and underlined my agreement. I think the answer should be simple, like 2 GWC's instead of 1. Not "as many GWC's as we want". Because while I am not in the camp that believes NASCAR makes it their business to 'script race outcomes', this would make it FAR too easy to accuse them of such. Since the definition of "yellow" changes even within the same race, allowing such discretion would be far less fair than simply allowing 2 GWCs and then calling it a day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NickFalzone

Highlighted and underlined my agreement. I think the answer should be simple, like 2 GWC's instead of 1. Not "as many GWC's as we want". Because while I am not in the camp that believes NASCAR makes it their business to 'script race outcomes', this would make it FAR too easy to accuse them of such. Since the definition of "yellow" changes even within the same race, allowing such discretion would be far less fair than simply allowing 2 GWCs and then calling it a day.

---

Yep, that's where I was going. I don't truly believe that they do that, nascar has had a habit the last several years of putting themselves in some tough positions with people because of their enforcement (or lack thereof) for some drivers and the opposite for others. This would give them a whole new headache that they really don't need right now.

Old buddy Dave Marcis almost got cheated out of his Richmond rain-shortened win by NASCAR way back in the day.....as Dave himself kinda said in an interview once: I heard race director (forgot his name) say over the headphones NASCAR had given me: "Dave Marcis is not going to win this race.".....if need be I'm sure I can find a link....So they kept trying to dry the track but the rain never let up and Richmond had no lights at the time so they eventually declared Dave the winner right before midnight after tearing his car and motor down looking for violations.

Moving on....I've never understood why NASCAR needs a GWC to begin with except as a way for them to manipulate outcomes. Sure, the claim is that the fans want to see races finish under green but this is one fan that wants to see racing as it unfolds, not as it is choreographed.

As always tho.....Your opinions and mileage may vary

Maybe they want to do the G-W-C restarts until their driver choice wins it ...
or maybe they want to squeeze a few more bucks from the fans at the trailers ...
IMO this will be a bad call for nascar, so what else is new ? :p
.
.
(welcome back damg, it is good to see you.) :D

One is too many.

I have always been of the belief the G-W-C policy is wrong, and it is one thing I have never wavered on, because the race ends the way it ends due to the drivers, and that is the only fair way. If on lap 199 there is the "Big one" in the 500...then that is the way it ends. Why make the race 203 laps long to suit some whim of the networks (the real people wanting this policy)? A team who gambled on fuel to run 200 laps is now forced to deal with 3 laps that are not Scheduled? This is nonsense...we don't need multiple G-W-C's we need NO G-W-C's.