TBK-Light.com

They throw cautions for a piece of paper on the track

Thanks, man... I know who Pat Summit is, but I'm really not up on my American University sport stuff. My alma mater isn't even in the same country, so my focus on University sports is north of your border. heheh

From reading your post I thought maybe the Horse didn't like people with alzheimer's... or something... I dunno. Kinda had me wondering what the hell I had missed.

Yeah, they actually announced it around the time I was in Gatlinburg, and there's a picture of Trevor, Pat, and the 60 car on the front page of the Knoxville paper from whenever day that was.

_________________
-Joe.
Atlanta United FC | Cincinnati Reds | Atlanta Falcons | Tennessee Titans

the American likes very much ABMoteurs
http://www.awfulannouncing.com/2012-articles/august/video-the-french-call-of-the-wild-nascar-finish-at-watkins-glen.html
http://www.sbnation.com/2012/8/13/3239559/nascar-watkins-glen-finish-video-french

_________________
Twitter - rallyman69

I think I have never posted in a NASCAR thread before and that was due to me not being able to follow the series, properly, on previous years. This year, I have been following it quite a lot, even the ovals which is something I basically detest. But I have been entertained even on some "speedways" as it's called. The "road courses" are a must, though. Montreal aside, which I already made clear several times on F1 threads, all Nascars "road courses" are great. Road America(pitty only Nationwide races on it) is fabulous, Sonoma is a fantastic track and Glen also much better than the average F1 track

This last race was very good, some nice battles through out the race and that epic last lap was mega. Do you guys think there is any chance Nascar will race more often on road courses, on near future? Or the average American simply won't tolerate it?

Road courses have always been sparse, so it would seem unlikely for NASCAR to add many more of them.

And concerning the average NASCAR fan, I think there is a bit more interest in road courses than they're given credit for but still not enough for NASCAR to feel any pressure to expand the RC schedule.

I don't understand why, in recent years, NASCAR is ok with throwing Nationwide cars on different road courses but Cup hasn't seen a new one since 1989. And I don't count Suzuka in 96, 97.

_________________
Go Miami Dolphins!
Go New York Yankees!
Go New York Rangers!

Back in the early 80's they used to run 3 races per year at Riverside, the start, middle and end.

Take away 2 dates from tracks that don't deserve 2 dates a year (Kansas and Michigan I'm looking at you) and give em to Montreal and Road America.

I think TV viewing fans would be ok with it since it obviously puts on far better racing than the intermediate track borefests but the ones that go to the track might not like the lesser visibility on offer from any given point on the course.

as we discussed at your house...bring em to brainerd.

In my experience, the people attending NASCAR road races are more road racing fans than they are NASCAR fans.

The perception is NASCAR fans don't like road racing, which might be true to some extent but I think that's changing as the road races are consistently putting on better shows than the ovals are. NASCAR will of course ignore this for the most part and it'll be AT LEAST 3-4 years before another road race is added to the cup schedule.

That only happened one time, in 1981, and that was only because the Ontario Speedway was closed down at the end of 1980.

_________________
-Joe.
Atlanta United FC | Cincinnati Reds | Atlanta Falcons | Tennessee Titans

Going from youtube comments(from American members) which are posted on the videos of Glen/ Sonoma, it really seems the people would like more of road courses. But Sandeep Banerjee's point might have a big say on it, unfortunately. I also suspect westracing01's point is quite the reality of it. I guess the more "traditional" NASCAR fan is not used to road courses and aren't up for a slight change on the schedule

You mean Pocono surely?

_________________
"Many people ask me why I always sign off Till We Meet Again, because goodbye is always so final. Goodbye Dan Wheldon." -Marty Reid

Pocono's different, it's unique.

nah pocono stays, i think.

im trying to remember the conversation we had. but darlingtons date would be moved back to labor day, and california speedway would be put off the schedule for like two years.

Pocono needs to stay for the simple fact that its not a "cookie cutter". I know that term's been overused, but Kansas doesn't need two dates, IMO. We've got Las Vegas and Chicago, and Kentucky's similar enough. Lopping off 100 miles from Pocono was a brilliant decision, too.

I feel like having one date at a track like Pocono or New Hampshire would make the race more special and make the fans that go to that track (hopefully) ban together to keep the date they have left leading to possible sell outs. How I'd make the schedule would involve taking out the second dates from Texas, New Hampshire, Pocono, Kansas, and Michigan and take away California's date because fuck that track. I'd replace those races with trips to Road America, Rockingham, Iowa, Montreal and maybe a couple fun races like hell have the cup run on Daytona's road course or go to a short track like South Boston or IRP.

I'd hate to see Pocono lose a date, because it's a hell of a facility, the owners and fans feel like one big community, and the race track is unique... but hot damn, seeing only 85,000 people there a couple weeks ago was heartbreaking. It's the smallest crowd there I've ever seen, and yeah, maybe one date a year would condense the fans only able to go to one race there per year (like us).

When a track loses a date, though, it's almost like a kiss of death in this sport. I'm hoping against hope that Atlanta never loses its date, because the sport needs that track. Badly.