TICKETS, “TESTS”, AND TIRES
THEY’RE MY TICKETS: Bristol Motor Speedway doesn’t
like free enterprise…at least for their customers. I can hear you say
"What’s he talking about?". Well, let me explain.
If I buy tickets to the Bristol races, and for some reason
I can’t go, I’ve got to sell them at face value. I can’t auction them off on
eBay. Bristol officials monitor eBay and pull the tickets from people they catch
doing it.
Two things: They’re my tickets. If I can find someone
crazy enough to pay more than face value for them, then I don’t think it’s any
of BMS’s business. They’ve already gotten their money. Secondly,
"scalping" is legal in Tennessee. Last time I looked at a map, Bristol
Motor Speedway was in Tennessee.
The standard rationale behind not allowing
"scalping" of tickets (or selling them above face value) is that it
protects the consumer. But I’d be willing to bet that the real reason behind it
is that they’re upset that they’re not getting the extra profit from the ticket.
DODGE THIS: So, how do you get rewarded for being
loyal to a particular "make" in the Truck Series? If you’re the
Keselowskis you lose your Dodge sponsorship.
Dodge sprung the news on the Keselowskis last weekend at
Chicago. And to add insult to injury, not only are they taking the sponsorship
away, but they’re apparently taking the driver and crew chief as well.
The team finished third in last year’s points battle, and
despite engine failures (those are Dodge engines) and other bad racing luck this
year, the team is solidly in the top ten in points.
Dodge wants a team that can win a championship. I suspect
that they’re going to one of the more established teams (Petty?). But it
certainly doesn’t say much for their commitments.
SPONSORS AS OWNERS, REVISITED: I recently wrote
that I didn’t think any good could come of sponsors owning a team. I had a
conversation over the weekend with a fellow who knows a lot more about racing
than me, and he gave me some food for thought.
If RCA had owned Cale Yarborough’s team, would Cale still
be involved in racing? What about the same for Bobby Allison?
The team owner is basically the middleman.
The sponsor gives him the money and he retains ownership of the team…even
though it’s not his money. So in effect, the sponsors already are what I’d
call owners by proxy. The owner isn’t in this sport for his health. I’m sure
that he takes a chunk of that money as profit, which is perfectly fine. But if
you have two different teams with $15 million sponsorships, and one of those
teams can spend all $15 million on the car, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist
to figure out which one will ultimately end up running better.
The 90’s saw the multi-car teams come into
their own, and basically squeeze out the "independents." I
predict that the double-naughts will see the multi-car team owners being squeezed out
by the corporate sponsors/owners.
HUMPY’S ONE-RING CIRCUS: Before I
get into this, let me make one thing perfectly clear: Safety in NASCAR should be
the number one priority, period. Anything that can be done to make it safer for
the drivers and pit crew members should be done. With that
said, the "test" at Charlotte Motor Speedway on Tuesday of "soft
walls" was, in my opinion, nothing more than a publicity stunt.
As usual, the media is eating it up.
Everyone from RPM2nite to the Associated Press has a story on it. I
applaud track operators who want to do more for safety, but they need to do
testing that is as close to real-world conditions as possible. Dropping a
5,000 pound Cadillac from a crane 100 feet in the air doesn’t exactly emulate
race conditions.
Real testing needs to be done in a
controlled environment, not in a circus environment.
HOW WAS BRISTOL?: I didn’t see the
Bristol race Saturday night. I taped it, but I haven’t watched it. I did listen
to it via my laptop computer while I was watching the local guys race at
Nashville Speedway USA though. It didn’t sound that exciting.
But don’t let me influence your view. Use
the link at the left to review the racing action. In the next few days, I’ll be
putting up a page that has the results of the last few weeks’ worth of race
reviews.
TIRES IS TIRES: What about all the
flap after Bristol about tires? In case you didn’t hear, a few crew chiefs are
saying that the size of the inner liners in the tires affects the way the tires
work. That’s why (the crew chiefs are saying) that a car can run great on one
set of tires, then with another set of tires the car handling is off.
At first, Goodyear basically denied the
claim. But now it seems that they’re testing the situation.
Now I don’t have a degree in engineering.
The closest I’ve come to tire manufacturing is three summers of working at
BFGoodrich making hoses and conveyor belts. But it makes sense to me that the
size of the inner liner could have an effect on the tire handling.
Goodyear, as the sole supplier of tires
for Winston Cup, Busch Grand National, and the Craftsman Truck Series has an
obligation to make sure that the tires are as identical as possible. If
they’re using inner liners over and over, it’s not unrealistic to think that
some are different sizes than others based on when they were manufactured.
It’s bad enough that Goodyear’s "new
generation" tire has affected a lot of teams and drivers. Goodyear needs to
fix the inner liner problem or NASCAR should look for a tire manufacturer who
can produce consistent tires and not be a factor in race outcomes.