Pointless On Points, And Wrong On Garage Access
The winner of the most races this year is ninth in points. The point leader
has just one win. For the last eighteen seasons the winner of the most races won
the championship only eight times. The title was clinched before the last race
the last four seasons, and not since 1992 has there been a point race where the
outcome had any chance of changing in the last race.
Thus is the indictment against the Latford Point System, a system briefly
examined by Jim Pedley to insufficient depth1.
In 1984 Terry Labonte won just two races and won the championship, then did
it again in 1996. Darrell Waltrip won a paltry three races and the championship.
Dale Earnhardt won a combined 14 races in his final three titles – less than the
18 wins Rusty Wallace got in 1993-4. Dale Jarrett and Bobby Labonte each won
four times en route to the title, less than Jeff Gordon’s 1999 tally of seven
wins and Tony Stewart’s 2000 tally of six.
Supporters of the Latford system always cite "consistency," never
mind that point systems are supposed to reward PERFORMANCE. Wins, laps led, top
fives, and top tens are supposed to mean a lot more than just the best average
finish.
And given this emphasis on consistency instead of performance, it does
contribute to boring racing, as teams worry more about points and the paycheck
instead of the win.
The excuse sometimes cited cuts to The Big Lie of modern racing – "Tony
Stewart said that a system that would make rewards for winning larger would
produce more dangerous racing. ‘I think you’d see a lot more crashing.’"2
No you wouldn’t, Tony. The dichotomy between ferocity of racing and crashes
is a bogus one. If anything, it is the OPPOSITE of this dichotomy that is true –
the more ferocious the racing the LESS likely there will be serious injury or a
crash. Certainly crashes do occur in such circumstances, but the implication
that the rules are to blame is wrong – if there were more crashes due to a point
system that made winning races vital to the championship, then that is the fault
of the drivers.
The IRL thriller at Texas is proof positive of why there is a need for a
complete overhaul in the point system. With a strong draft, excellent down force,
and excellent tires, the IRL’s Lonestar 300 also had an ultimate championship
scenario – the top two in points had to win the race to win the title – making
for a great race. Sam Hornish and Helio Castroneves raced for the win, because
they had no choice – win and you’re in. And they took chances even the Winston
Cup drivers shy away from – there is no slingshot passing in IRL; a car has to
suck up to and alongside another car and then crowd him off to clear into the
lead; it is why such IRL races are usually compared to NASCAR restrictor plate
racing. As great as slingshot racing is – the NASCAR Modifieds raced like that
at New Hampshire the day before – it is actually more exciting and requires more
skill to race like this than with slingshot passing.
Such is how Hornish and Castroneves (and everyone else) raced at Texas, and
the two used bravery alien to modern Winston Cup racing to try and win.
Hornish’s title hopes seemed to disappear with a green flag stop and an
ill-timed yellow, but he was still on the lead lap and fought through the field
into victory contention. The two crowded each other so closely they actually
touched wheels to side pods, and stayed that way to yet another IRL photo
finish.
The title was on the line, and they raced like it. This is the kind of
scenario needed for point battles anywhere. Even NASCAR’s famous 1992 Dixie 500
championship race wasn’t as close as the IRL’s championship race in 2002 – Alan
Kulwicki didn’t have to win the race to win the title; Bill Elliott had to win
the race but that didn’t win him the title.
The point system needs to entice the drivers to race for the win, because
performance is what counts – wins, top fives, top tens, laps led. All field
positions should pay points, but the above-listed performance ends of racing are
what need to pay more. That would help make the racing in NASCAR’s circles more
competitive.
—————————————————————–
Then there is the self-inflicted wound NASCAR is pondering – restricting fan
access3.
"The drivers have had enough and now it’s up to NASCAR to break from the
past and limit the number of people who get to rub elbows with their stars
backstage in the garage area."
So says Wally Dallenbach, and the wrongness displayed helps explain why he
doesn’t have a competitive race driving job. So what if 1% of the fans in the
garage get under drivers’ skin? That some fans are pushy is not cause to
restrict garage access, because all that does is alienate ALL fans. Dallenbach
complains about fans who don’t understand the protocol – but that is just
self-deceiving nonsense. Drivers ALSO don’t understand the protocol, and if THEY
can’t understand it, then these drivers don’t belong in Winston Cup.
There is no solution to this problem because, ultimately, there is no
problem. Fan access to the garage, contrary to the whines, does not impede team
preparation, nor does it impede drivers’ ability to work. Far more serious to
drivers and teams in the garage are the inspection hassles that are everyday occurrences
and also the occasional garage squabble – Larry Lackey’s knockout of Ricky Rudd
wasn’t even the worst seen; I still remember the mini-brawl between two SK Mod
teams at Thompson in 2000 that nearly got me, an innocent passerby, trampled.
Limiting fan access is not a necessary evil. It is an evil, period. Fans make
the sport, and limiting their access is wrong, period. If drivers can’t handle
fan interaction – and the increasingly spoiled Winston Cup class is showing it
can’t – then those drivers need to either change their approach and make
themselves able to handle it, or get out.
The big story entering Dover is the use of softer tires. While not as soft as
tires run in the late 1990s, they are nonetheless softer, and it has Rusty
Wallace happy as heck. But as usual he is wrong. The lack of wear in the tires
is not the reason for lack of passing – it is the lack of a draft, the
aero-push, too much horsepower, and a general lack of grip. The bottom line is
that the tires should not be wearing at all. Drivers should not have to conserve
anything – they should be open throttle going for the lead at all times. Tire
management is cowardly. Slow down to go faster is the wrong way to race – speed
up to go faster is the right way.
If Goodyear’s softer tires make for better grip, fine. But better grip ought
to be achieved without making tires that require more stops and this higher tire
bills.