Turn 3

Big Apple fans...sour towards NASCAR?

By Krista Voda

NASCAR's marketing gurus have, for the last few years, had NYC media exposure at the top of their to-do lists, constantly pitching drivers and promotions to the national talk show circuits.

In the last month, alone, Ray Evernham and Erin Crocker were outside the New York Stock Exchange. Mark Martin and Carl Edwards appeared on "Guiding Light." Larry King's roundtable discussion with Jeff Gordon, Rusty Wallace, Kyle Petty, and Kasey Kahne re-aired on CNN, as the network heavily promoted its hourlong medical special with Dr. Sanjay Gupta last month.

The sport is banking on its popularity, its growth, and its transition from southeastern moonshiners to Hollywood city-slickers. Just look at today's drivers...how they dress, who they date. They are the future of a sport that's trying to change its image. Not because anything is necessarily wrong with the old one. But because that image just doesn't fit Manhattan, a city that speaks in dollar signs.

I was recently in the Big Apple for a day. Just enough time to see that in a city made up of residents from all over the world, NASCAR is the only thing that's foreign.

It's true. Mike...the taxi cab driver from Romania...has more in common with most New Yorkers than the sport built on American horsepower.

Some gentlemen who work in Manhattan asked me if I'm familiar with the city. I tell them just enough to be dangerous, as I've been to NYC a handful of times, including each December for NASCAR's awards banquet.

They seem shocked. "Why in the world would NASCAR come to NYC?" (Hmm. Exactly what the marketing folks DON'T want to hear). What my new friends don't realize is that the sport's top gala is a pretty big deal. It was first held at the Waldorf-Astoria in 1981.

Next, these guys ask me if I've always been a racing fan. I say no. The sport became part of my job, and it was only then that I came to appreciate it. I point out some of the changes and developments NASCAR has made in its effort to go "mainstream." One of the guys agrees, basically saying the sport has really taken off now that Danica Patrick is on board.

Seriously. Here's the kicker. These guys don't work on wall street. They work in sports.

These are the guys who snicker when they hear the southern twang of an Elliott Sadler. They are also the guys who stand in line at NYC clubs (and probably never get in) while Sadler and Jeff Gordon are escorted to private VIP tables. I imagine Gordon shops in stores that these guys have only read about in magazines.

Yet, Sadler and Gordon (and probably every other driver in the sport) will take the time to talk to someone on the street. Something most New Yorkers wouldn't fathom. After all, no time for small talk or casual observances. Barely enough time to choke down that triple-grande mocha-cinnamon soy latte, nonfat.

Maybe these guys just need some time to learn the sport.

After all, the city that thrives on speed is scheduled to get some of it around 2010. ISC has already slapped down a cool 100-million for a plot of industrial land on Staten Island. Plans are in the works for a state-of-the art NASCAR-sanctioned track.

Perfect. Maybe, then, they'll be able to meet Dan Wheldon.

Being a Cubs fan

By LEE MONTGOMERY

There's no joy in Wrigleyville. But there is at Poppen's Auto Service in Whiting, Ind.

My Uncles Donnie and Bobby probably won't stop smiling for several days since their beloved White Sox won the World Series. And why not? The Sox haven't won since 1917, meaning celebration has been pent up for 88 years.

But on the North Side of Chicago, and in places all over the United States, there is sadness, a touch of jealousy and more frustration. Another World Series without the Chicago Cubs. Sure, the cynics will say that's nothing new, for the Cubs haven't been in a World Series since 1945 and haven't won one since 1908.

What does this have to do with racing? Not much, really, but sports in general can teach us a lot about life.

You can learn about teamwork, discipline, and sacrifice through sports. We've seen that in NASCAR time and again. The best drivers and teams have those characteristics, and the best baseball players and teams have them, too.

Sports isn't life, but we can learn about it. As fans, we follow a certain driver or team or player for myriad reasons. Why I picked the Chicago Cubs is beyond me, but here I am, frustrated again.

But the Cubs are real. Life isn't always about celebration and happiness. Life can be cruel, from losing a job to losing a loved one to - as Gulf Coast residents have learned - losing everything. Sometimes things simply don't go your way, no matter how hard you try.

But Cubs fans aren't losers. Hardly. You think Bill Murray is a loser? Or Jim Belushi? Or (gasp) Hillary Clinton? They've done fairly well in life, and, yes, they're Cubs fans. And what about a guy named Kurt Busch, the 2005 Nextel Cup champion. Cubs fan.

Go ahead, make fun of us all. That’s fine. For as Cubs fans, we have learned to live with the ridicule. Thick-skinned, stubborn, loyal. Qualities that make us Cubs fans make us tough.

You wouldn’t give up on your children if they failed at school or failed at Little League or failed at music. No, you support them, encourage them and tell them to try again. At least you should.

And you wouldn’t give up on your driver if he failed a time or two. Even the best drivers in NASCAR win less than 10 percent of the time. You stick with them, wishing for better times. So Dale Earnhardt Jr. and Jeff Gordon didn’t make the Chase for the Nextel Cup this year? As one of their fans, are you going to give up on them?

If you do, you aren’t a fan at all. A true fan, like a true parent or a true friend, sticks with his driver or team no matter what.

That’s another thing being a Cubs fan teaches you, maybe the most important thing of all.

Hope.

There’s always next year. Now that the White Sox have won it, it’s got to be.

Give me the original 'Gong Show'

By LEE MONTGOMERY

Did anyone watch the debut of "Roush Racing: Driver X" on the Discovery Channel earlier this week? No? Well, here's a synopsis:

1. It's hard for Roush Racing to pare down the thousands of applications for it's Gong Show.

2. The ones that do get invited love racing and will do anything to get the Roush Craftsman Truck Series ride.

Now there's no reason for you to watch. I'm not sure why I did, for the first episode was, well, let's be nice, mediocre. Maybe it'll pick up in later episodes when we finally get to see the actual Gong Show.

If the first episode is any indication, I doubt it.

For the unitiated, "Driver X" is a NASCAR reality TV show based on Roush's search for a driver for its Craftsman Truck Series ride. Kurt Busch and Todd Kluever are past winners, and they're not doing so bad.

So Roush and the Discovery Channel hooked up to go behind the scenes for Roush's latest Gong Show.

Now, if you don't get the Gong Show reference, you are too young to be reading this. The original Gong Show was some classic TV. If the Discovery Channel worked "Driver X" around the original Gong Show premise, they'd have something.

As it is, "Driver X" needs a lot of work. Viewers were told too many times how much young drivers want to race for Roush, as if race fans didn't get that already. But maybe this show isn't for race fans. If not, maybe "Driver X" can work.

If it is, they missed the boat. I can't imagine real race fans wanting to watch much of it, for the show is way too basic - at least the first episode.

Maybe I'll watch the second to see if it's any better. I doubt it'll ever match American Chopper, and I know it won't come close to the original Gong Show. But it is racing-related, so it must have something going for it, right?

By the way, we already know who won: Erik Darnell. Now there's REALLY no need to watch.

Blowin' in the wind

By DAVID GREEN

The Formula One folks have come up with a revolutionary idea -- a two-piece rear wing that engineers say will clean up much of the turbulence encountered by a driver who attempts to follow closely behind a competitor's car.

That's a breath of fresh air, if you'll forgive the play on words, for any race fan who has grown weary of the term "aero push."

The so-called CDG (Centerline Downforce Generating) wing places separate airfoils behind each rear tire of the vehicle, allowing air to flow smoothly over the body of the car. The separate wings produce downforce by deflecting the air flowing over the rear tires.

So simple, it's brilliant.

FIA President Max Mosely, in introducing the concept to F1 team owners in London Monday, promoted the innovation as something that will improve close-quarters competition. He acknowledged that F1 fans, in a recent survey, strongly indicated they'd like to see more heated competition -- more passing, more wheel-to-wheel racing.

NASCAR fans have always taken pride in the entertainment value of stock car racing, but let's be honest -- it's not quite as good as it used to be. And aerodynamics are largely to blame for that.

I'm no engineer, so I don't profess to know how this split-wing idea might work (if at all) on a full-bodied racecar. It's easy to see how it might work on an open-wheel single-seater; the tires are already creating a measure of turbulence, so the work of the airfoil is merely managing that flow. (Perhaps Purdue alum Ryan Newman could weigh in on this.)

But, if I may be so bold as to suggest it, let's make that (aero push, not necessarily a split rear wing) a top-priority project for the NASCAR R&D Center sometime soon.

Oh, and by the way, let's hope (those of us who give a rip about F1, that is) that the team owners embrace the FIA's innovation and introduce it soon. It seems to me that the idea should work well in IndyCar and Champ Car racing, as well. It might pay its best dividends on ovals, because the sustained high speeds create the greatest amount of turbulence with which drivers have to contend.

open mic

By Krista Voda

Live TV is a wonderful thing. With it, comes honest words. And with honest words, sometimes come hard feelings and regret.

But that's what a true moment is about. Uninhibited thoughts and un-sterilized comments.

And nobody does it better than Tony Stewart.

As soon as the question was posed, "What about the incident with Greg Biffle?", I knew we were in for a treat. As a fan, you sit on your couch in eager anticipation to hear exactly how Stewart will phrase, describe, define the "moment" this time.

He's an idiot.

No wonder, all those times, Kevin Harvick wanted to kill him.

They name streets after guys like him...One Way and Dead End.

I play poker with him. I like the guy, but if he was here right now I'd have to strangle him.

I'm not here to place blame, to tell you the truth, I don't really care which driver was at fault.

I just appreciate the honest entertainment.

And I'm not saying I always agree with the way Tony Stewart expresses himself. (I thought his bad-mouthing of Darrell Waltrip last year was out of line).

But he has a right to say whatever he wants. Especially in this sport where instant TV access, with immediate interviews of the athletes, is a part of the game.

========================================

Of course, live TV also means the chance to screw up royally!

Tony's teammate, rookie driver Denny Hamlin, found that out during an interview on "NASCAR This Morning." Hamlin, a Busch series regular, was driving the third Gibbs car at Martinsville. He'd been fast all weekend in practice, and was eager to start the race. So eager, perhaps, that when thanking those who gave him the opportunity, he mentioned the hard-working employees at UPS. Too bad his sponsor is Fed Ex.

Hamlin immediately recognized his mistake and recovered as best he could. Remember, it's not a sponsor he's used to carrying. I say don't sweat it, Denny. Keep putting your car up front and the executives will surely go easy on you.

And take it from someone who has had her share of flubs on live TV, there will always be a better interview...and a worse one...down the road.

There's bumping, and then there's bumping

By DAVID GREEN

Yes, there was some contact when Tony Stewart made his way past Jimmie Johnson to take second place in the Subway 500 at Martinsville Speedway Sunday.

But let's clarify things just a bit here: Stewart's move was NOT the infamous bump-and-run that guys such as Subway 500 winner Jeff Gordon use regularly. It is ignorant at worst and disingenuous at best to suggest the tactics are the same.

Stewart got a fender inside Johnson's left rear going into Turn 1 of lap 490, and held his ground when Johnson tried to slam the door on him. The contact, which caused Johnson to bobble, was initiated by Johnson as much as by Stewart; Stewart could have tried to brake and give Johnson the inside line, or Johnson could have given Stewart room on the inside.

Each driver had an option, and each had some risk in the matter. The contact easily might have flattened Stewart's right front tire.

Such is not the case in the cold-blooded, front bumper-to-rear bumper contact that is designed to knock a competitor out of the groove, rather than fairly take it from him. Usually, the only risk to the bump-and-run artist is retaliation sometime down the road. If the bumper doesn't do a good enough job of his dirty work, as was the case with Kevin Harvick vs. Ricky Rudd at Richmond a couple of years ago, he gets his payback a little sooner rather than later.

What Stewart did versus Johnson Sunday is hard, high-risk racing; what Gordon, Harvick and others do with the bump-and-run is a cheap shot that demeans their achievements, just as the overly roughhouse tactics the late Dale Earnhardt often used made many fans and competitors angry.

In another incident Sunday, Greg Biffle accused Stewart of trying to crowd him into the wall after he moved past Biffle late in the race. Stewart was passing on the inside, and allowed his car to drift upward before he had completely cleared Biffle. The incident angered Biffle, who set out to try to wreck Stewart in retaliation but failed.

Biffle could have held his ground, the way Stewart did in his fight with Johnson, and Stewart might very well have been turned hard into the backstretch wall by contact with Biffle's left front fender. So, if Stewart was in fact deliberately crowding Biffle, who was a lap off the pace, he was taking an extremely stupid risk to do so. If the "crowding" was accidental, it could have been a costly error.

From this perspective, Stewart is a hard-nosed racer, but not a dirty one. I've seen him lose races to the bump-and-run tactic, but I've never seen him win one that way. When and if I do, my feelings about the tactic will be the same as those expressed here.

one-year anniversary

By Krista Voda

I would imagine there's a tinge of sadness attached to every single day. But, for 8 families, this weekend will be especially difficult.

It will be a year ago Monday that 10 people, en route to Martinsville Virginia, lost their lives in a plane crash. (8 families because three victims were from the same household, John Hendrick and his daughters Kimberly and Jennifer).

Every NASCAR fan remembers the moment.

If you were watching the race at home you were probably wondering why Jimmie Johnson wasn't celebrating the win. Instead, the 48 and all other Hendrick teams, were being whisked away to learn of the tragic news.

In the days and weeks that followed, the NASCAR community lived up to its family-focused image. From drivers to mechanics to officials, hundreds attended memorial services. Thousands posted condolences. Millions said prayers.

Rick Hendrick said he's not yet sure whether he'll attend the race at Martinsville. I can't blame him.

As wonderful as I'm sure it would be to receive the love and support of his colleagues, I can't imagine having to re-live that terrible day. And to do so, under the scrutiny of television cameras.

As a member of the media, I understand the need to tell the story. But as a human being, I understand the desire for privacy.

No doubt, the sadness will swell from a tinge to a tidal wave.

As fans, all we can do is keep the families in our thoughts and reflect on the lives of ten people... Ricky Hendrick, John Hendrick, Kimberly Hendrick, Jennifer Hendrick, Joe Jackson, Jeff Turner, Randy Dorton, Scott Lathram, Richard Tracy, and Elizabeth Morrison...who are deeply missed.

Tire woes: Ay, there's the rub

By DAVID GREEN

What a "tire-ing" season this has been. From Formula One's U.S. Grand Prix fiasco to last weekend's Lowe's Motor Speedway pop-fest, it's been one of the worst years for the tire industry since the Ford-Firestone hoopla of a few years ago.

The F1 situation is easy enough to understand. First, you have competition among tire suppliers. As folks in NASCAR well know, that leads to a smaller margin of error on the competitive side and less emphasis on durability. To further complicate matters, the powers that be in grand prix racing prohibited routine tire changes after time trials, so the drivers had to qualify and then race on the same four tires.

In NASCAR, it's a little more curious just why there have been so many races this year with so many tire-failure problems. Goodyear has the market cornered. The company is not going to get beat by a competitor. So, why has it had such numerous problems this year?

Well, NASCAR had rules changes, too. Although they were not as drastic as F1's action, they did place the tire supplier in a bit of a dilemma. Changes in the aerodynamic package meant a loss of aero grip. To compensate, teams had to increase mechanical grip. A softer-compound tire would be one theoretical tool with which to accomplish that. Diminished inflation pressure would be another.

As William Shakespeare phrased it in Hamlet, "ay, there's the rub" -- literally, and in the Bard's figurative speech, as well.

Grip, after all, is that elusive perfect compromise between too much friction and not enough. The tire's contact patch must adhere to the track surface so the driver can accelerate, brake and corner. The better it adheres, the more heat it generates. If it generates too much, the materials out of which the tire is constructed will fail. Not enough, and the traction will not be sufficient for the driver to maintain control.

Unless he slows down.

Which race drivers are loath to do.

I wrote in an earlier post about the difficulty of undoing technology or any other kind of advancement. This is yet another example of that univeral truth. Drivers' comments give away their human-nature tendency to want things both ways -- really grippy tires that enable them to go fast and maintain control of their cars and tires that are reliable and long-lasting, as well.

Goodyear's tires are an important part of the evolutionary process that has given stock car drivers the capability of going 193 mph at Charlotte. The process has also brought us to the spike in blowouts we've seen this year. The tires just haven't kept up with the cars and the tracks in this supposed-to-be-symbiotic relationship.

The ineffably capable Humpy Wheeler, one of the sport's pillars, has taken responsibility -- perhaps even more than he should have been expected to do -- for the problems. But in fairness to Humpy and to Lowe's Motor Speedway, it's not only his track where tire problems have become the dominant news subject of the weekend.

I'm not sure how much technology is transferred to Goodyear's passenger car tire business to benefit the consumer, but I'm satisfied that engineers learn things in NASCAR racing that pay residual benefits for highway drivers. Despite all the problems that have marred this season, I've not lost any confidence in the tire supplier.

But I sure hope we can get through upcoming races without more recurrences of such problems.

Best advice remains, ‘Check your local listings’

By DAVID GREEN

I imagine Krista Voda may weigh in on this sooner or later, being the TV insider among this blog’s contributors. But I’ll go ahead and offer my two cents’ worth about the weekend’s rumblings about NASCAR television coverage.

NBC gave the sport some pretty good credibility, considering the network’s place in the overall electronic media scheme of things. For sure, both Fox and NBC have worked hard to provide innovative coverage and promote the sport.

Die-hard race fans were no doubt aggravated by the late-running Southern Cal-Notre Dame football game, which cut deeply into the time NBC allocated for coverage of Saturday night’s UAW-GM Quality 500. They were rewarded when NASCAR delayed the start so that NBC did not miss coverage of the start of the race.

It was a positive for racing, given that college football fans not emotionally exhausted after the fabulous game might have been tempted to stick around and catch the stock car race.

For that, all race fans (especially those of us old enough to remember the two-week-old, heavily condensed coverage we used to look forward to on ABC’s Wide World of Sports) should be grateful for the TV coverage we now have.

Having said that, allow me to say this: The product Fox and NBC have delivered did not accomplish one of the things we were promised. It did not successfully consolidate coverage into something the fan could keep up with more easily. I would argue that the coverage became even more fractured than it was in 2000 and before, when CBS, ABC, ESPN, TNT and TNN all took turns covering the sport.

From the corporate perspective, Fox/FX/Fox Sports Net may be a singular thing. For the fan with a remote control in his hand, it is anything but. Ditto for NBC/TNT. All are on different channels, and all of us don’t get all those channels, and we have to hunt for them – just like we did in the “old” days.

Over the past five seasons, I have continued to find myself having to resort to some source of information to confirm the channel where I should seek coverage on a particular weekend. I knew last night’s race at Charlotte (oops –- I mean, Lowe’s) was on some NBC-owned channel, and if I’d had to guess, I would have guessed NBC. But, I trust you get my point.

As a consequence of Fox’s and NBC’s heavy reliance on cable properties or partners, the new package did not significantly benefit consumers who (a) did not subscribe to cable or satellite service or (b) their provider did not carry the full array of channels on which NASCAR racing appeared.

I understand the NASCAR season is too long for one network to devote that much coverage, and that the ABC/ESPN deal is going to be more of the same.

I’m OK with that, and anytime I’m not, I just remind myself of how it was in the 1960s and ’70s.

Just don’t tell me, please, how much easier it’s going to be for me to ascertain which channel I tune to from week to week when ABC/ESPN returns to the fold.

Fly your flag while you can

By LEE MONTGOMERY

I may get crucified for this, but like one of the posters in the discussion board said, this is a free country.

The Confederate battle flag. Hmm. I bet if I stopped writing right here, I'd get tons of comments. For whatever reason, that flag stirs up a lot of passions.

My question is, why? It's a flag from a nation that doesn't exist, a flag of a nation that wanted to bring down the United States of America and a flag of a nation that lost to the United States of America.

Oh, and did I mention it was the flag of a nation that supported slavery?

So why would anyone in their right mind want to even see it, let alone fly it? Got me.

But, sure, it's your right, if you want to interpret the Constitution that way. Something about free expression. Go for it. Fly away and show your ignorance.

And remember this, if Brian France wants to curtail the display of said flag, that would be his right, too. NASCAR isn't a government entity, and if NASCAR, through its tracks, wants those flags not to be displayed, there's not a whole lot you can do about it.

A race track is private property, and if the owner of that property doesn't want people wearing blue shirts on their property, bye bye blue shirts. Same thing for flags.

Now, I don't see what good it'll do to ban blue shirts, but it might do some good to ban the Confederate flag. Maybe it'll keep the ignorant people away. Maybe it won't. It is every American's right to be ignorant, and if you want to fly that flag on your property, feel free.

Maybe I'll go get a few of those flags and burn them in protest on my property. That's my right, too, isn't it?

Or are rights like that only limited to the ignorant?