geko29

You act like none of that stuff is in any other kind of racing. It's all there, and substantially more. And yes, wind, drafting, and spinouts were included in the simulator. Two a**holes did bump into me on purpose. One was a human (another friend of mine) and another was a computer driver. So semi-no to G-forces (they're simulated on an instantaneous basis, but obviously not on a continuous one) and no to tire wear (5 laps, remember?) and imbalanced tires.

But the end result is roughly twice as many of the aspects of racing were simulated as in an average video game, and yet the video games are substantially harder. And so is actual racing, which I've ALSO done. No matter what else you're doing at the time, it takes FAR more skill to accelerate, brake, and turn both directions while shifting gears than it does to drive straight with your foot planted and occasionally lean to the left.

You mentioned the effects of uneven tire wear? Try watching a motorcycle race. At some tracks a SINGLE tire is made up of three different compounds, depending on the layout of the track. On a track with a lot of right turns, the right side of the tire can become useless long before the left even starts to wear. Or on a course like daytona, where there's close to a mile on the banking at 200mph before you drop back into the infield and make a right turn, you have to be extra careful because with that long high-speed run, the right side of the tire is now cold and won't stick to anything. Oh and there's a bump (gutter) right as you start leaning from the left side to the right.

That's another good example of the a**holes you mentioned. Going into a corner, another rider can come to the inside and turn UNDERNEATH you, so your bike is laying on top of his, and you can't lean any farther. Then you can either stand it up and run off the track, or you can lean more and push him into the ground, hoping you don't simultaneously lever yours wheels off the ground and meet the wall at 160--with no safety cage to protect you.

Back on topic, however, this guy continues to prove what a douche he is. I really hope F1 fails and FUTA takes its place.

Lil4X

Bernie has been a loose cannon for many years, but he has yet to sink F1. We've had similarly screwy commissioners of baseball and football, who, save for free agency, have done little long-term harm. In time Sir Bernie will be forced to step down because F1 is a game of money. His own personal fortune pales beside the kind of investment that a 21st century F1 team requires. Given free rein on costs, F1 has developed some outstanding new technologies, but the costs of engines alone has put participation out of the reach of all but a few teams underwritten by powerful sponsors or personal fortunes. It has become corporate sport.

Contrast that with the Indycar Series, where open-wheel competition is accessible. The formula here includes identical naturally-aspirated 3.5 Honda V8s, Dallara chassis, iron brakes, Firestone tires, and a selection of three wings for the wide range of tracks. That's it. Oh, and a price cap of $309,000 on your car. That's down under NASCAR costs . . . for a car capable of over 220 mph and braking, cornering, and accelerative forces that bend the eyeballs. Indycar specs HERE

In fact, the Indycar series took a page from NASCAR when they set their formula - rather than favor exotic engines and extreme chassis, they opted for something a rather wealthy individual could field, even with minimal sponsorship. The result has been a series largely dominated by the rich and powerful, but just this weekend lightning struck as Dale Coyne won his first race as either a driver or an owner - in 558 attempts over the past 25 years. Now there's a Cinderella story that brings out the crowds. Justin Wilson brought home a victory to a one-car team, downing the powerful Penske and Target/Chip Ganassi teams that dominate the series, and won going away. Don't look for that in F1.

http://sports.espn.go.com/rpm/racing...ory?id=4307325

Indycar features a series that combines road courses with street races, much as F1, although Indycar has far better TV coverage in the US than F1. The racing is close, thanks to the tight formula leveling the playing field for all. About all the major players can do to increase their odds of winning is to field more cars and hire better talent, but it still leaves a crack in the door for the guy in a hot car with a good deal of luck and driving skill, to bring home a trophy. Try that in F1.

NASCAR was overhauled a few years ago by Bill France Jr. and his board, to produce a better public contest. Limiting the technology cut costs to the point that you can field a car in either the Sprint Cup or Indycar circuits for the price of a backup engine in F1. Sponsors love it because they get to go racing and reach hundreds of thousands of fans for a minimal cost-per-view.

NASCAR was re-engineered for television and has the advantage of racing on an oval that provides the fans, even in the cheap seats, a good view of every foot of the track. New tracks were opened across the nation, spreading what was once thought of as a "Southern" sport across the nation. It is far and away the fastest growing spectator sport in America, adding fans every weekend and baseball and football have priced themselves out of the market.

Why? Well, first because it is exciting, even for first-time watchers. In F1 and Indycar venues you see only about 10% of the race, and you listen to the radio for the rest. If you pick a good vantage point you may see some critical passes, but otherwise it's just a radio show.

Oval racing was designed for the fans, with door handle-to-door handle racing, But it still retains a great deal of variety in every turn, on every track. Yes, the turns are all to the left, but variations in banking, grip, transition and exit speeds make each of those left turns totally different in terms of car prep and driver skill. You can't begin to compare it to a video game; this is real - with a real chance of injury or death as the price for stupidity. It's a race of closely-matched competitors taking extreme heat and physical battering while employing sophisticated race strategy to squeeze the last erg out of fuel and rubber to get to the finish line first.

If it were easy, everybody would be doing it.

raytseng

Actually, it is somewhat partially related as a history lesson especially this year. The IRL/Champ split effectively diluted the American viewership bleeding both off and cementing the dominance of Nascar as the top American race venue.

A section of discussion before the British GP suggested that the recent FOTA/F1 split (now a bluff) might end up the same way, with competition of "2" world championships series causing an overall loss of viewers and that F1 should learn lessons from the US.

Imagine if Baseball/Football/Basketball actually still split between 2 leagues and did not have a world series/championship.
Or consider why all the "unification" for boxing or other fights draw big bucks.

UDel

Nascar racing's appeal to its fans has much more to do with the actual drivers and their personalities then the actual cars and racing. Many fans are just fans of a certain driver(they are not all rednecks now) and often don't concentrate or care about the cars, specs, tracks, technology(lack of), performance, strategy, etc. Since around the mid 90's mainly with the immense popularity of Jeff Gordon Nascar has reached a much larger audience in the US and it is no longer mainly just a southern and Detroit thing but it still has yet to get much attention outside of the US. I know plenty of people including my parents who are the furthest thing from rednecks who like and enjoy watching Nascar but it is mainly for their particular favorite driver.

The big multi car wrecks in Nascar are also what makes it popular and you just don't see the type of wrecks and frequency of wrecks in other racing types like you do with Nascar. Nascar also has that all American appeal too kind of like football and baseball where many Americans may like it even more because it is not popular or even done in other countries and is unique to the US.

F1, Cart, Indy, Lemans, GT, etc just don't have drivers who appeal to US audiences like Nascar drivers. Viewers of F1, Indy, Lemans, GT are usually male car enthusiasts and often watch those races more for strategy, technology, and their favorite brand of vehicle then the driver. They have had a few popular drivers with US audiences like Danica Patrick for Indy but not on the level like Nascar does.

I doubt F1 will be anywhere near as popular in this country because although to car enthusiasts it appeals more it does not have the same kind of appeal Nascar does to US audiences, particularly the drivers who many find just too young, cocky, and at times have such heavy foreign accents you can barely understand them. I do like F1, Lemans, GT more but I do see the appeal of Nascar and its drivers and spectacle to US audiences which is why it gets so much more coverage and attention.

raytseng

While crashes are one thing, I think it's somewhat a simplification (with some condescending overtones) to state that that is why American viewers like nascar and don't like F1. There's equally as dramatic crashes in other race series too.

F1 just have far less on-track overtaking. Unless there's a wet race or other special circumstance, you could count the overtakes for a whole race with your fingers and toes. The outcome seems to rely on what done in the pits then on the track.
It's pretty much just watching people drive the track-for some races, it looks the same as a practice day.
So while that is fine for someone who just wants to see the cars doing laps on a track, it doesn't have the special spectacle of an actual race. F1 viewership suffers from this worldwide, not just in the US.

This is why there were the host of changes in F1 aero-package this year, but still with those changes there's little chance to overtake.

Lemans (especially 24h) is even more along these lines as each car just goes on it's own strategy and opponents seem to freely overtake if they're faster or slower, so it's more or less a parade also.

Regarding the drivers, if anything, F1 has more access to the participants then any other sport. They're all required to do race-weekend pre-race events, speak English,have microphones stuck in their face 20minutes before the race and 20 minutes after the race as well as immediately after they completely blow it and crash.
So in this regards, the FIA drives the sport as a business more then any other thing I've seen. For example they scheduled the Malaysian grand prix to take place at dusk so it'd fit the European viewer's schedule's better (the majority of their audience).

So I completely agree with you that open wheel won't ever be as popular in the US as Nascar, but for different reasons then you mention.

Allen K

iTrader: (4)

Since F1 was mentioned - there is more drama surrounding the next year.

Full article here: http://www.cbssports.com/autoracing/story/11934198

2002GGPIS3

All very good points, quickly on NASCAR, road course and short track races are some of the best racing you can see, but iIagree the big tracks are really boring.
On to Bernie and Max, they should be locked up, they took a great sport and have just ruined it. They also have to understand that F1 will not be popular in the U.S., yes there is the NASCAR factor, but really the U.S. sports calander is full, compared to Europe who only put soccer above F1. Meanwhile the U.S. has NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, college football, college basketball, NASCAR, IRL, golf majors and tennis majors- all these will always be more important then F1, but the few F1 fans there are out there, can spend money, you know the guys that buy Ferraris, rolex watches etc.. that is the only thing Formula one should care about.

Mr Johnson

For me part of the attraction has always been the cutting edge of the technology involved in the machines themselves. Unless you dig into it you can't imagine the things F1 has come up with to improve performance over the years.

Before the limits they had engines revving at 20K RPM. The carbon fiber we all love for the chassis and suspension (instead of as ashtray covers ). I could go on and on and on about the technology in F1 (hollowed out screws to save weight?!).

Compare lap times on a circuit where multiple types of cars visit:
F1 - 1'14.9
Champ Car - 1'20.0
Rolex Sports Car - 1'33.2
NASCAR Nationwide - 1'42.0

That's an amazing amount of acceleration, braking and g-forces. That's why I love F1.

All this is now being potentially flushed down the drain by Max trying to turn it into a spec series. *sigh*

I8ABMR

NASCAR, if you guys were not aware< is in very very bad shape secondary to massive corporate sponsorship decline and cut backs. I dont care. I would rather watch a good SCCA race than a bunch of "racers" going around in circles..... er ovals

UberNoob

first is the hanky spanky Max Mosley and now it is the racially intolerant Bernie Ecclestone...

no wonder F1 is coming to an end...