Apart from that restart battle (so every restart), this is really bad.

I guarantee you, reducing engine power will NOT solve the aero-dependency problem.

To the people who obsess over hating the 400 "for the good of Indy":

they could hold a foot race here and I won't give a shit. just don't compare it with winning the indy 500

Wonder if Brian France is going to have a word with F1 and get hold of their CGI advertising software to add 3D animated spectators to the stands.

I don't understand NASCAR logic. It's like they realised the Gen 6 was crap last year (despite all the OMG LOOK AT OUR LEAD PASSES STATS!!!), so they held tests with the aim of improving the on track racing. At the end of it all, I think they added extra downforce and lowered the cars. Racing sucks because the cars have too much downforce, so let's add more of it!

Now they're looking at taking the power away, so you'll have the cars cornering at exactly the same speed, but it'll be even easier to nail the throttle coming off the corner, and even less braking/lifting off required going into the corners. Do we want to see the drivers challenged, or cars glued to the road? Given how much they promote the sport by showing big crashes, you'd think they'd want the cars to be difficult to drive so we have more spins and incidents.

Is it that hard to get rid of the splitter, put a smaller rear wing on, and maybe raise the ride height up? Do you not think fans might be more attracted to a product that has good on track racing? Or will the attendances continue to decline as they come up with the latest stupid artificial ideas? THREE WIDE RESTARTS! POINTS RESET BEFORE THE FINAL RACE! FAN VOTE TO CHOOSE THE LEADER ON THE RESTART!

The more I think about the "less horsepower, more downforce" thing is maybe they're trying to make every race run around in a pack like Daytona/Talladega. Or at least the cookie cutter tracks.

Other wise I simply will never get their philosophy on it.