Turn 3

The Big Picture

By DAVID GREEN

A week ago, Racecar Graphic Ltd. hosted the fourth annual World Motorsport Symposium at world-famous Oxford University in England. The two men who presided over the symposium were aerodynamicist John Iley of Ferrari and engine guru Dr. Andy Randolph of Earnhardt Childress Racing. Kurt Romberg of Hendrick Motorsports was also a speaker.

NASCAR engines have gotten a considerable amount of respect at this event, with Chevrolet's new R07 engine and its development team, led by Jim Covey, honored last year.

So it shouldn't come as a shock, I suppose, that Randolph was chosen as one of the leaders of the two-day session or that Romberg talked aero with the international racing crowd. But it raised my eyebrows.

I mean, in recent years, the Brits have to a considerable extent gotten over our snit about the taxation without representation thing and our subsequent departure from their Empire. For more than a century now, we have been fast allies. And there has been more than a little crossover, of personnel and ideas, between NASCAR and various international forms of racing, up to and including Formula One.

I guess I'm more thin-skinned than I like to admit about the condescension that was prevalent on the part of the global racing community toward NASCAR for so long.

It goes both ways, of course. Some NASCAR fans are pretty arrogant in their dismissal of road racing in general and F1 in particular. But at the end of the day, the average Englishman can be so much better at arrogance and condescension than most Americans.

Getting past all that, it's interesting to note that in the session overseen by the Ferrari aero specialist, NASCAR's new car was a topic of great interest.

I have to re-read the promotional line from the British Web site F1 Fanatic to believe it:

In the final part of his look at the future of aerodynamics in motor racing, John Beamer looks at how F1 is following NASCAR in using aerodynamics restrictions in a bid to improve racing - although NASCAR’s efforts have not been entirely successful.

"How F1 is following NASCAR..." Wow.

For those who don't know, F1 will adopt radical aero modifications for its cars next year. There's much anxiety about whether or how well the changes will work to improve the product. As Beamer notes (and Mike Daly will surely agree), NASCAR's new aero package did not work out all that well in 2008.

What does it all mean? I don't know. But I think the symposium is a great thing for auto racing and I'm glad American racing is involved in it. It constitutes a big-picture look at the sport and its future, and it does not have one genre, manufacturer or sanctioning body's undue influence.

In a tenuous time, it's a reason to be optimistic.

Im NASCAR Thankful for

By Keith Ott

Hey all, there were a lot of things that didn’t go right this season. A lot! But, then again, there are still things we can be thankful for.

#1, on my list, are the crews and drivers: Don’t care who they work for, or what country their manufacturer has his mansion in, these guys rock. I don’t even care what they get paid. Their work is thrilling, scary and dangerous. That pretty much covers why we watch, ya think?  Them Thar’ guys have earned a well deserved holiday. I’m thankful for that.

#2, on my short list, is us. We, the “Real” fans, who sat through this tedious season, will be back. NASCAR can and will throw whatever at us, and, at the end of the season, we still love racing. I’m thankful for you guys. Yes, even Mike Daly.

That’s it. It was a short list, and I have cooking preps to do.  Another Sr. Chief and I herded up a few shippies, from various ships, that had nowhere to go, and we borrowed a few Canadians (down for exercises) for an American Thanksgiving meal, and, cough, beers and football. It should be fun. I hope you all have a Great One.

What are you thankful for?                  

Biggest surprises of 2008

By DAVID GREEN

We all get frustrated at times, but as long as I can keep my head on reasonably straight, I prefer to emphasize the positive instead of the negative. So, I'm going with "surprises" as the topic of this post, to avoid terms like "disappointment" and "failure" and so forth.

Jimmie Johnson's record-tying third straight Cup championship has to go in both the surprise/no surprise categories, in my opinion. Johnson was anything but a long shot in February, but given that only one other driver had ever strung three titles, it had to be something of a surprise that he accomplished it.

But that was far from the biggest shocker of the year.

Carl Edwards' feat of winning nine Cup races and the manner in which he finished the season -- sweeping Nationwide and Cup races at Homestead, and finishing second in both series' driver points -- was an impressive accomplishment, but not really shocking. Edwards long ago proved himself one of the present generation's most capable drivers.

Empty grandstand seats and diminishing television ratings were not really a surprise, either. I'm old enough to remember the days when sports writers could write for credentials to a NASCAR event and get two or even four complimentary grandstand tickets, to boot. We're not back to those days (not quite). But it still is a little bit jarring to me when the TV cameras accidentally pan over a large expanse of grandstand without people sitting there.

Kyle Busch's blistering pace of the regular season and his swoon during the Chase were both pretty gobsmacking, but at the same time, not. Busch, like Edwards, is already -- even at his young age -- way beyond the point of being accused of pulling off an upset when he wins any race. The rash of victories was surprising only because of the bunches in which they came. As for the slump, the argument could be made that Busch used up his good fortune in the first 26 races. So that's not the big surprise.

It was a good thing that the Craftsman and Nationwide series delivered close championship finishes while the Chase, geared to do just that, did not. These things ought not be engineered to be falsely "exciting." However, it has to be mildly surprising that the Chase has foundered so badly since that first one.

Ryan Newman winning Daytona to start the season, then leaving Penske at the end; Tony Stewart leaving Joe Gibbs Racing; Dario Franchitti failing to last a full season in NASCAR and the Ganassi slump in general, in comparison to that team owner's success in the Indy Racing League; all were newsworthy, but not exactly man-bites-dog stories.

For me, the biggest, most jaw-dropping occurrence of 2008 was that five of the sport's top drivers and biggest stars -- Dale Earnhardt Jr., Jeff Gordon, Tony Stewart, Matt Kenseth and Kevin Harvick -- won, among them, two races all season. Cumulative total.

Gordon, Kenseth, Harvick -- winless. Zero. Zilch. Nada. And -- although they all count -- the single victories that Stewart and Earnhardt scored certainly came in some manner other than spanking the field. If not for some successful strategy and a favorable NASCAR ruling, all five could have been shut out.

Come on -- try to convince me you weren't shocked and awed.

Test ban treaties now and then

By DAVID GREEN

The headline Friday -- NASCAR implements test ban to cut costs -- took me back to the year after the Cuban missile crisis, when the Test Ban Treaty of 1963 was signed by President John F. Kennedy. It outlawed testing of nuclear weapons in the atmosphere, outer space and underwater.

The treaty Kennedy signed (it was one of the last significant actions of the president, who was destined to die from an assassin's bullet a little more than a month later) had little to do with cost-cutting, as NASCAR's test ban does. It was more about survival of the human species than it was about economics. NASCAR's concern is about survival, too, but in an economic sense.

It's hard to say whether the nuclear test ban accomplished anything of significance. And it's doubtful that the NASCAR treaty will, either. But I'd have to say I approve of both actions.

Even though I was a few months away from my 11th birthday in October 1963, I was aware of things that were going on. The previous summer, I had watched seemingly endless Army truck convoys carrying soldiers down U.S. 98/441 past Lake Okeechobee in Florida, where I lived in those days. I had watched with my mom and dad as Chet Huntley and David Brinkley gave solemn reports about Soviet nuclear missiles 90 miles from the U.S. mainland.

My friends and I played out scenarios in which we thwarted the progress of invading Russian and Cuban soldiers, but along with a fascination about the great adventure the missile crisis was to me, there was a sober understanding of the stakes of that "game."

A decade later, I would be working as a public affairs specialist with the Defense Nuclear Agency at its Field Command at Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque, N.M. I would learn some of the details about how, in order to comply with the 1963 treaty's ban on atmospheric testing, U.S. scientists conducted underground tests and resorted to other measures.

They built mountainous stacks of TNT explosives to achieve the force of a nuclear explosion without producing the radioactive fallout, and could measure the blast impact on various hardware components, physical structures, and so forth.

They found a way.

There's little reason to think the NASCAR ban will be dealt with any differently. The test ban does not prohibit NASCAR teams from testing at alternative sites -- such as Rockingham Speedway and Concord Motorsports Park in North Carolina, Greenville-Pickens Speedway in South Carolina, USA International Speedway in Florida, the old Texas World Speedway near College Station, Texas and any other facility not on a NASCAR national touring series schedule.

About the only thing missing from the menu is a replica of the two restrictor-plate tracks, Daytona and Talladega. So, the matter of testing expenses won't go away. In fact, the intent of the rule -- to prevent lesser-funded teams from falling behind in the data acquisition department -- may have the opposite effect. Wealthy teams will be better able to seek out and utilize alternative test sites.

Likewise, the issue that the treaty addressed did not disappear with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Today, the concerns are not about civilized, modern nations such as France, which had recently joined the nuclear age with an atmospheric test of an atomic devicein 1962. Now it is rogue nations such as Iran and North Korea and guerrilla terrorists who make the rest of the world uneasy. Treaties don't count for much with these outlaws.

With regard to nuclear weapons and racing technology, the genie is a long, long time out of the bottle. She's not going back in. That doesn't mean we should throw up our hands and not attempt to regulate things in a rational and civilized way. Make those who would reject the restrictions of the treaties work that much harder and spend that much more to circumvent them.

Dealing with economic issues in sport has a good many similarities to dealing with uncivilized aggressors in the modern world. Just as evil individuals and organizations will find a way, so will racing engineers and team owners.

Thankfully, the stakes are not as catastrophically high for the latter as for the former.

Jimmie IS One Of The Best Ever, Period

By Mark Young

OK race fans the time has come.  As we sit smack dab in the middle of the final race week of the 2008 season it seems to have not as big of anticipation as it should.  Jimmie Johnson is sure to clinch his third consecutive Sprint Cup Title and nobody is making much out of it, including this blogger.  But I have decided to commit my post this week to giving some much deserved respect to Jimmie.

Three consecutive championships has only been done once and it his name wasn't Petty or Earnhardt.  Cale Yarborough not only won three championships in a row he dominated them, much the same way Jimmie Johnson has in his last three seasons.  Sure the Chase format has managed to keep it relatively close but none the less, Jimmie flat out dominated.

He has won at every possible type of track except for a road course.  He has taken a bad car and, with the help of a great crew chief,won races.  In fact, Jimmie has done in so smoothly that I can't recall any on-track or off-track confrontations with other drivers.

Do I sound sappy?  Do I sound like a suck-up because my favorite driver didn't win it?  You might think so but I don't care, I am just finally admitting that Jimmie Johnson is not only a great driver but quite possibly one that should be mentioned in the same sentence with Earnhardt, Petty, Gordon, and Yarborough.

What do you think?

Interesting times

By DAVID GREEN

There's scholarly debate over its origin, but there can be little argument that the expression "may you live in interesting times" is apropos for those of us who inhabit the world at this point in time. "Interesting times," indeed.

How bad things are, how bad they're going to get, how to counter or minimize or just how best to deal with it are all topics that are of some importance to most of us, if not all.

If there are places of refuge -- genuine refuge, I mean, not just hiding in a literal or figurative cave and pretending it will all go away -- none of them has to do with auto racing. The social and cultural turbulence surrounding motor sport these days diminishes the aerodynamic effects of a modern racing car to a zephyr.

From NASCAR to Formula One, it seems that panic buttons are ready to be pushed. The protective guards have been flipped out of the way and fingers are ready to press. Most of the angst is about manufacturer support -- specifically, about whether there's going to be any.

In America, the problem is the distress U.S. automakers are experiencing. Ford, Chevrolet and Dodge all have been deeply involved in NASCAR racing for at least the past decade. Parent corporations Ford Motor Co., General Motors and Chrysler LLC are struggling mightily to survive.

In F1, it's less about financial stability, although BMW, Ferrari, Honda, Mercedes, Renault and Toyota are not immune to the present economic situation. It is more about dissatisfaction with FIA President Max Mosley's push for standardized pieces. NASCAR fans can relate; Ford, Chevy and Dodge (along with Toyota) have been less than enthusiastic about the new spec-bodied Sprint Cup car.

All forms of auto racing survived the Great Depression of the 20th century. World War II brought an intermission, but after 1945, racing quickly resumed and steadily grew. Its upward spiral has only recently peaked.

U.S. open-wheel racing had its crisis a dozen years ago. Except for today's state of the world economy, the Indy Racing League might be poised to make great strides. Given the economic problems, it might instead be the most vulnerable.

It's hard to foresee a miraculous recovery from the present economic dilemma. We'll see just how resilient we all are in the coming months and years. We'll see how various sports, entertainment and recreational endeavors fare, and how savvy or clueless their leaders turn out to have been. And we may find out that things have been so radically altered that we won't have much concern to spare for such trivialities.

Interesting times, for sure.

Atta Boy Kyle

By Mark Young

Well my fellow blog heads, I like to call things as I see them, and Saturday I saw something that I just feel compelled to write about.  I know that quite often I am hard on people and like to squawk about the things they do that are generally bad and Kyle Busch has been one of my whipping boys . I am again going to write about something Kyle said in victory lane following his 10th win of the season in the Nationwide Series.  The difference this time is that Kyle said something right, at the right time, and he should be commended for it.

For those of you who aren't aware of the significance behind Kyle's tenth victory in the Nationwide Series let me expand a little.  Kyle's victory tied him with retired driver Sam Ard for most wins in a season.  Who is Sam Ard?  I found myself asking those same questions so I did a little research.

Sam Ard won back-to-back Busch Series Championships in 1983 and 1984 after finishing second in 1982.  In those three years he won 22 races and had an average finish of right around 5th.  Unfortunately a very serious accident at the Rockingham Speedway forced Sam to retire.  25 years later Sam Ard is limited to mobility via a wheel chair and is battling Alsheimer's disease.  After retiring from racing Sam has fallen onto hard times financially and has been forced to sell both of his Championship rings as well as other memorabilia like the two Grandfather clocks he won at Martinsville.

Now I know many of you out there could be saying that Sam's situation is not much different than others we all know and I agree.  But there is one thing about many of the "old school" racers in NASCAR and that is that unlike practically all other professional sports NASCAR does not have a pension plan for retirees.

Kevin Harvick has done a great deal of work to try and help Sam out and so has Richmond International Speedway and several other companies and organizations.  But let's get back to Kyle shall we?  Now we have all heard Kyle spout off about this or that showing his age and experience, both of which are very limited.  I have ripped him for his lack of respect on several occasions but this blog is dedicated to the respect he showed on Saturday.

Kyle's donation of $100,000 to Sam Ard and his family speaks volumes to his maturity process.  We all are easy to find fault in people and overlook when people do the right thing.  I just thought I would take a little time to express how Kyle got it right this time.

In a historic election year, thoughts on diversity

By DAVID GREEN

NASCAR's Drive for Diversity seems to have taken on a lower volume level in recent years, with more attention focused on grassroots development and less hype about the Great Minority Hope taking the Cup Series by storm.

That's as it should be. Instant promotion to the big leagues, just for diversity's sake, would be a very bad idea. Every driver, regardless of race, creed, color or religious affiliation, should pay his or her dues and demonstrate worthiness.

Of course, that's a "perfect world" concept. It hasn't always been that way, and it isn't now. Many a driver has been accused, a good many of them rightfully so, of buying his way into a ride he never would've gotten strictly on merit. Many others have used economics in an indirect way -- by showing themselves to be excellent representatives of a sponsor outside the cockpit. In some cases, it seems that has offset underwhelming performance on the track.

So far, the biggest diversity splash in American racing has been made by women, one in particular. Danica Patrick has her share of critics, both personally and professionally, but she has impressed all the right people so far in her IRL IndyCar Series career.

You just know NASCAR has to be envious of Formula One for its newest star, Lewis Hamilton, the first black driver in the international series. Auto racing's version of Tiger Woods is a Brit, not an American, and he races open-wheel grand prix cars. As American voters gear up to in all likelihood elect the country's first black president on Tuesday, Hamilton is on the cusp today of becoming F1 champion.

Hamilton has been a controversial figure since he was named to drive for McLaren on the heels of his 2006 championship in GP2, the top F1 feeder series. Some of the controversy has been about his race, but most of it has been about his racing -- specifically, that he's a ruthless driver and is considered dangerous by some of his rivals.

Racial reactions have come mostly from Spain, where Hamilton has been jeered and heckled during races and practice sessions and where a "virtual voodoo" Web site has been set up in the hope of jinxing Hamilton's drive today in the Brazilian Grand Prix at Sao Paulo. F1's governing body, the Federation Internationale d' le'Automobile (FIA), has condemned the racism.

Economic problems that threaten auto racing and every other aspect of American life may have a negative impact on the Drive for Diversity, too, but assuming the sport survives, it will continue to evolve. The evolution will surely include changes in the diversity of drivers.

Hopefully, racing organizations will require solid pedigrees of all participants.