F1 vs. NASCAR...not just another thread

What would your ather watch, a competitive race that is not decided until the end or a processional race where the only overtaking (if any) occurs during pit stops?

Let's not kid ourselves. We are all F1 fans here (obviously) but that does not mean that our sport is the "best" or the only form of motorsports worth watching. I enjoy F1 for what it is but I also acknowledge that other forms of motorsports, NASCAR included, have their own unique attroibutes and merits that make them enjoyable as well. I am a neophyte when it comes to NASCAR, not having paid much attention to it until JPM joined the series, but the limited time I have spent watching and learning about the sport have taught me a great deal about what makes this form of racing so appealing to the American viewer. I don't think that one should have to knock other series to build up F1. F1 is a great sport but it is not the only form of motorsport.

 

Dear God, we agree again. :}

I have had the honor of being a professional motor sports photographer way back when sex was safe and racing was dangerous. I covered F1, NASCAR, Indy, SCCA, CanAm, sprints, everything except drag racing. I met some incredible people, some I miss today, some I still hear from today.

From that close up experience, I grew to appreciate the differences in each racing category, and understand that you really can not compare any two fairly. My favorites are still F1 and NASCAR, so diverse and different. But I will never forget CanAm when Donahue, Hulme, Revson and friends were racing. Or when TransAm meant Camaros, Javelins, Dodges, Mustangs and others racing side by side at MidOhio, Riverside, or the Glen. Watching Gary Bettenhausen race a sprint car after having his right hand "fixed" after an accident so his fingers were always in the position of gripping the steering wheel. I regret never personally attending a BTCC event when it was really great. There is nothing in motor sports like the first lap of the Indy 500, even today. Or spending an hour talking to Cevert just before........

What I am trying to say, its all good, we are all supposed to be "car crazy". Isn't that why we are here on FChat?? So why are some of you so critical?

If you do not understand it, it is not the sport that is the problem, it is you.

 

Andreas, that is so cruel. If this is true, does that mean all F1 drivers are gay? ;}

 

The women at F1 races have all their teeth and didn't come to the race with the brother-boyfriend. Oh and they are super f*ckin hot.

 

It struck me that (if I am not mistaken) in the following passage, all the drivers you mentioned, save Denny Hulme, died in a race car...

 

I'd rather watch F1 yes. As said, I don't see the point of Nascar. Same goes for the Indy500 to some extend. The grid doesn't really hint at who is in with a shot. In fact, they all are. You can be running dead last and after a SC-period, be in contention for the win. I just don't get that and it takes away from the glory of being in front.

I follow all sorts of motorsports. Be it touringcars, GT's and openwheel-racer. It doesn't matter, since I don't have to choose. I've tried Nascar but to me they're a bunch of ugly cars, remarkebly limited in their function of being a racingcar and the drivers don't really appeal to me either.

It is all a matter of taste, I know, but to me there is no easier question as F1 vs Nascar.

 

Haven't been to a NASCAR race lately have you?

 

Actually, Gary B was recently managing an IndyCar or ChampCar team, I forget. So unless years of race car wrecks shaking his brain cells took their toll in the last few years, he is still alive.

But you are correct, the rest except Hulme sadly died in a race car.

 

Toyota is also in F1.

 

Whereas in F1 there is no need to actually watch a GP once qualifying is over?? How is that in any way interesting?

While there are many reasons I enjoy watching F1 over NASCAR, exciting racing is not one of them.

 

My mistake, it is Tony Sr. that died in a race car, Tony Jr. died in a plane crash and Gary is still around.

 

You seem pretty bitter. I get your arguement, NASCAR is big, and for a lot of good reasons. But I, me, not talking about anyone else here, could watch F1 cars all day. If I watched NASCAR all day, I'd need a bucket to puke in from my head going in circles. That, and I'd rather look at sexy cars and women than stock cars and stock women.

THAT'S MY OPINION. YOU ARE NOT WRONG. YOU ARE NOT IGNORANT. YOU ARE DIFFERENT. No need to quote me just to get another post in.

 

Well no. If you'd actually watch F1, you'd know there is overtaking in F1 and if there is no overtaking, there will be the threat of overtaking. It is in laptimes, in strategy and the overtakingmanoeuvre actually means something, because overtaking in F1 is difficult.

And that's ok. I find Nascar ridiculously boring. It's F1 dumb little brother. I have a hard time taking it seriously (so I don't). I suppose that is ok too.

 

NASCAR vs F1: Would Chip Ganassi just toss away Heidi Klum?

 

im personally on the f1 side but have watched nascar when they are on the road course and it is pretty interesting instead of watcing people take left hand turns all day

and ferrari lvr im doing the exact same thing a persuasive speech on f1 vs nascar can you email me your outline for some ideas? thanks

 

Ahh - It's good to know you can still "steal" someone elses work - Or, at least ask to steal it

[I owe you a sincere apology IF you've already sent *your* outline to Ferrari_lvr of course. And, given this thread, how many comments do you need?....]

Anyway, reading this thread popped a question into my mind that I know I could research, but I'm hoping our "enthusiastic" students may also be interested and see the relevance:

What percentage of Nascar/F1 drivers with more than, say, 10-15 starts (?) have won a race over the history of the sport? (And, if you can drive a 3D graph, over different timeperiods.....?)

I, at least, would be interested to hear the answer as I *suspect* the numbers may not be quite as different as "intuition" tells us.

Good luck,
cheers,

Ian

 

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Not at all bitter. Just amazed at how myopic people can be.

 

.ditto.

 

Hmm...

I recognize that NASCAR is good racing, along with all other forms of racing, but it's just beyond me how people can enjoy it so much. It seems like someone new wins every weekend. That way, I can't really pick a driver to follow, because the chances of winning are quite slim, although I do respect Tony Stewart. With 43 shoe boxes with laundry detergent logos all over being driven by guys nobody has ever heard of, I just can't get into it. Hell, if you yelled out "Hey Dale!" at a NASCAR race, there would probably be an overwhelming roar of of "Yeah?" throughout the whole place.

In F1, I can name all the teams, drivers, title sponsors, etc. It's not so crowded and unorganized. In F1, I have my favorite team and drivers, and I can root for them every race, knowing that there is better than a one-in-billion chance they can win.

Just my $.02,

John

 

Unless they are driving a Ferrari or a McLaren, that is pretty much the odds that they will win...

 

I think the name "Dale" means the same to most race fans.

My $.02, I can not see anything wrong with a series where any one of 20 starters can win an event. That tells me the cars are fairly even, and the same for the drivers. That's racing. That's competition. That's probably what keeps the fans coming back for more.

World wide, F1 had lost a lot of its viewership between 2002 and 2005. Could it be because of the domination of Ferrari during the Schumacher years? I hope that in 2007, there really is more competition, and that Kimi and Felipe have to work hard for their wins. I would rather see a five second margin of victory for the podium, than the 50 second margin we usually see.

Bottom line, no series is really better than the other, they all have their own appeal. There is no reason to slam another series just because you do not understand it, or it does not appeal to you for any reason. Possibly if you gave it a real open minded chance, you would be surprised.

 

It all comes down to what you want from racing:

NASCAR being a stock series really isn't about the cars (particularly true now with the COT), but about the drivers, their driving talents, strategies and to some degree luck with the yellow (nothing wrong with that).

F1 is an engineering exercise and a racing series. Technically you get the most advanced race cars on the planet. For better or worse. That loads the deck of the winners and even if you are MS, you won't win in a ToroRosso. That can be seen as fair, unfair, boring or exciting.

Comparing the two is therefore really comparing apples and oranges. And that's not even talking about the differences of oval racing vs road courses.

While I really don't care for NASCAR (GTE best describes it as "not getting it", I have tried myself and don't get "it" and find it boring), the series does a bunch of things right that F1 could learn from to improve its own show. Night races, more races, remotely controlled cameras, accessability of the drivers and teams being some of them.

 

Whats your email address?? I just did it today btw.

 

LMAO!!!!!