Tisk tisk tisk

[Pete]

Wasn't it Junior Johnson that once got a protest that the size of his gas tank allowed him to skip pit stops? They pulled the tank from his car for tech inspection and he then drove it home to Orlando (Back when NASCAR raced stock cars) using the gas remaing in his fuel line.
Turned out he had about 50ft of fuel line

That was Junior. He had 50 feet of fuel line coiled up under a tarp where the back seat was supposed to be.

 

[Pete]

Why yes, as a matter of fact, I am.

But IMO, the word "champion" doesn't mean what it did a few years ago.

 

[crabcake]

do you have a point or are you just upping your post count?

 

[Oz]

Why yes, as a matter of fact, I am.

But IMO, the word "champion" doesn't mean what it did a few years ago.

Bet Jimmy Johnson wouldn't mind the designation...

 

[crabcake]

Bet Jimmy Johnson wouldn't mind the designation...

I'm sure he wouldn't, and I'm not saying Skurt isn't the champion in accordance with the current rules/points system; I'm saying that what it took a few years back to be champion isn't the same as today. Back then, it was more about skill and winning races. Now, you just need luck and a few top 5s.

 

[Oz]

I'm sure he wouldn't, and I'm not saying Skurt isn't the champion in accordance with the current rules/points system; I'm saying that what it took a few years back to be champion isn't the same as today. Back then, it was more about skill and winning races. Now, you just need luck and a few top 5s.

A few years back, there were also more "have-nots." Now, there are at least 35 guys who can win each race. 10 Years ago, there were maybe 15. Guys like Mark Martin and Rusty Wallace (not to mention Terry Labonte and Bill Elliott) are retiring because the sport has become "too demanding."

I'm not too sure I would quickly discount what it takes to become a Champion. If anything, "The Chase" makes it more demanding at the end of the season, when past champions could be much more conservative for that stretch. Only once since 1990 can I remember a Championship being more than a 2 driver race (when Kulwicki won a 3-way race with Davey Allison and Bill Elliott.) Back then, a "have-not" like Kulwicki, could actually win a championship with a few Top-5 finishes... How many single-car operations made the Chase last year? (Answer=0) The highest single-car team last year in the point standings was Ricky Rudd in 24th place. But Wood Bros are affiliated with Roush.

I think the Chase has made it even more demanding.

(And I'm not even a Kurt Busch fan!)

 

[crabcake]

I think the Chase has made it even more demanding.

(And I'm not even a Kurt Busch fan!)

Don't get me wrong; I don't dislike the chase format. It made for one helluva exciting season finale last year -- down to the very last lap like that ... doesn't get any better. But when I looked at the stats for the top two (and no, it's not just cuz my driver was the runner up .... if this were Andretti, I'd feel the same -- happy pete? ) ... but anyway, JJ had several more top 5s & 10s, as well as wins (3 or 4 of which were IN the chase races). I think (and I've said this before) that if they gave more points to the race winner, it would even things out. The point of going out there is to win races, right? :shrug: Not to just be in the top 10 all season and get lucky. And the DNFs really hurt teams, but they're not always that driver's fault. I think that giving the race winner a couple more points reduces the "luck" factor and puts the focus back on the point of racing -- winning.

 

[Pete]

I'm sure he wouldn't, and I'm not saying Skurt isn't the champion in accordance with the current rules/points system; I'm saying that what it took a few years back to be champion isn't the same as today. Back then, it was more about skill and winning races. Now, you just need luck and a few top 5s.

Since the mid 70's it has all been about consistency. This just adds more excitment to the finale` to boost interest by having a playoff. Nascar has always tweeked the points system and rules to suit the changing times. If anyone misses out is it the team in 11th place on the 27th race of the season because that team could win the last 10 in a row and still not be champion.

It has always been about skill, you don't consistantly finish near the top without skill. Like it or not Kurt has skill, so does Wimmer, Green, Gordon, Martin or anyone who is at that level. Of course some have more skill than others just like in any other sport. I would suggest that it has a great deal to do with equipment, financial resources and factory support. Put Johnson in the #43 and do you think his skill would make that car finish in the top 5 week in and week out?

As far as luck goes it is just that, luck. With 42 other cars, 8 cylinders, 16 valves, 16 pushrods, 8 spark plugs, cam shafts, 8 connecting rods, 16 valve springs, fuel pumps, carb floats and jets, oil coolers, tires, lug nuts, and the hundreds of thousand different variables that can mean the difference between top 10 in points and bottom 10. The difference between a Championship and 5th in the points can be as little as one DNF or getting wrecked on lap 17 of Las Vegas.

Nascar changed the rules, you just go with it. Belittling someone who wins the championship or the championship itself because in your vast experience of 3 or 4 years you "just don't like it" is not a valid argument not to mention Petty, HA a pun.

 

[Pete]

Don't get me wrong; I don't dislike the chase format. It made for one helluva exciting season finale last year -- down to the very last lap like that ... doesn't get any better. But when I looked at the stats for the top two (and no, it's not just cuz my driver was the runner up .... if this were Andretti, I'd feel the same -- happy pete? ) ... but anyway, JJ had several more top 5s & 10s, as well as wins (3 or 4 of which were IN the chase races). I think (and I've said this before) that if they gave more points to the race winner, it would even things out. The point of going out there is to win races, right? :shrug: Not to just be in the top 10 all season and get lucky. And the DNFs really hurt teams, but they're not always that driver's fault. I think that giving the race winner a couple more points reduces the "luck" factor and puts the focus back on the point of racing -- winning.

The winner does get 5 more points than the second place. The only way he does not get more is if the #2 guy leads the most laps, then they tie.

 

[Oz]

The winner does get 5 more points than the second place. The only way he doe snot get more is if the #2 guy leads the most laps, then they tie.

I think they fixed that last year...??? (The winner now will always get at least 5 more points than second place.)

 

[crabcake]

Belittling someone who wins the championship or the championship itself because in your vast experience of 3 or 4 years you "just don't like it" is not a valid argument not to mention Petty, HA a pun.

Forgive me for not being an old fart who's scratched my azz and drank my beers in front of the tv for years upon years watching it ... doesn't mean I'm not entitled to an opinion.

Here's what I'm looking at/talking about. Forget the names of the drivers, b/c as I said earlier, that's not the issue for me. If it were lame azz Kyle Petty in JJ's spot, I'd argue the same point:

-- 5 more wins (3 of which were in the last 10 Chase races)
-- 10 more top 5s
-- 2 more top 10s

But second place? Even those numbers show JJ is more consistent with better finishes. What dinged him is the DNFs, some of which were not the fault of him/his car/his crew; rather, the misfortune of some other driver resulting in his car being collected in the wreck.

I know I can't make Nascar change how it awards points, but I can back up the opinion to which I'm entitled with numbers that clearly raise the question. At least I'm not b!tching that a driver should've won "cuz he's got a cute butt."

 

[Oz]

At least I'm not b!tching that a driver should've won "cuz he's got a cute butt."

In that case, I'd be champion!

 

[Pete]

Forgive me for not being an old fart who's scratched my azz and drank my beers in front of the tv for years upon years watching it ... doesn't mean I'm not entitled to an opinion.

Here's what I'm looking at/talking about. Forget the names of the drivers, b/c as I said earlier, that's not the issue for me. If it were lame azz Kyle Petty in JJ's spot, I'd argue the same point:

-- 5 more wins (3 of which were in the last 10 Chase races)
-- 10 more top 5s
-- 2 more top 10s

But second place? Even those numbers show JJ is more consistent with better finishes. What dinged him is the DNFs, some of which were not the fault of him/his car/his crew; rather, the misfortune of some other driver resulting in his car being collected in the wreck.

I know I can't make Nascar change how it awards points, but I can back up the opinion to which I'm entitled with numbers that clearly raise the question. At least I'm not b!tching that a driver should've won "cuz he's got a cute butt."

He did have more DNF's and that does not show consistancy. Busch had the same odds of having a wreck, getting hit, blowing a motor as JJ had. You are smart, do the math, what is the average finish of a 40th and 4 wins? 8.8 Now what is the average finish of 5 - 5th place finishes? 5 Which one shows consitancy?

I see your point, and know that you are entitled to an opinion, but to make a "qualified" proclaimation or your opinion about what "constitutes" a real champion opens you up to be discredited.

 

[Oz]

I'd argue the same point:

-- 5 more wins (3 of which were in the last 10 Chase races)
-- 10 more top 5s
-- 2 more top 10s

You forgot the 4 more DNF's that Jimmy Johnson had last year, compared to the Champion...



All of Jimmy's wins actually gave him a higher average finish. But the DNF's killed that advantage. Kurt only had 2 last year to Jimmy's 6 DNF's...

 

[crabcake]

I realize JJ had more dnf's (I believe I said in my previous post that's what lost him the title) ... my point is when you look at those stats, it basically means that Skurt won b/c he was luckier than JJ in not getting caught up in other people's wrecks; thereby, reducing -- in last year's case -- the championship outcome to an issue of 'luck'.

My beef with it is -- and again, I don't expect the points system to change b/c I feel this way -- that the points systems rewards consistency ... fine, but if the point of racing is to win, shouldn't that be a higher priority and thus a bigger reward given? :shrug:

In that case, I'd be champion!

I'll be the judge of that!

 

[Oz]

the points systems rewards consistency ... fine, but if the point of racing is to win

The point of each race is to win. The point of running an entire season is to win the Championship. Short term priorities versus long range priorities.

I wouldn't want the guy who won the most races in a given year, to win the Championship if he didn't finish the other 20 races either...

 

[crabcake]

I wouldn't want the guy who won the most races in a given year, to win the Championship if he didn't finish the other 20 races either...

Now there's a perspective I hadn't considered before. :lightbulb: Though I doubt it's likely someone is gonna start the season, with 10 races, and quit the rest of the season and just stop by NY in November to pick up his trophy.

 

[Tomcat]

CHEATERS CHEATERS CHEATERS

If you go back far enough, NASCAR had its beginnings in cheating, a bunch of good old boys runnin' illegal whiskey. It’s always been pushing the grey areas to the limits for that extra advantage. Remember back bumpers falling off? I read once where a team left a roll of 200mph tape (duct tape) and a helmet on the drivers seat during inspection, both were made of solid lead. Check hereand here
All that being said, I don’t think they should be messing around with things that could directly affect the safety of drivers, fuel systems especially.

 

[Oz]

f you go back far enough

 

[Tomcat]

Oops :dosman: