Really? Why start off so confrontational? Why not simply start a NASCAR thread and share your interest with those like yourself? Why does it matter? If you like NASCAR, good for you. If others do not, so what?

Well, that's your opinion. I could get suckered into this debate but as I said it is pointless.

I don't recall anyone ever stating that NASCAR was "not" racing. That really is not an issue.

Again, you started the thread . . . it wasn't as if you were responding to anyone challenging NASCAR as a form of racing. Perhaps F1 fans like myself are not "race" fans, certainly not in your broad definition of the word.

Nothing that I could say . . . even if I wanted to engage . . . would sway you from your love for NASCAR, and vica versa . . . so why even go down that path?

 

I don't mean to exacerbate the argument, its just that this sort of question has in my experience often posed to incite squabble, not so much to gain an understanding of the other perspective.

You seem to have your mind and argument clearly at the ready . . . do you really want to simply understand why one follows a sport over another?

 

No, I did not "knowingly" invite controversy. I think the "vs." in the title is very misleading because it was not my intention to pit the two AGAINST each other. I wish I could change it to something like
"A Discussion Between NASCAR and F1 Racing" but it might be too late. I listed the two for the reason that in my experience it has always been F1 = Best Racing and NASCAR = NOT Racing. I wanted to see if NAM felt this way as well. You have definitely reinforced it. I'm not a huge fan of F1, but I watch it every weekend it's on because it's just another form of racing to watch on a Sunday

I'm not trying to force NASCAR on anyone. I can't change your mind (or anyone's mind) about your feelings on NASCAR. All I wanted to hear is some justifiable reasoning behind some otherwise unintelligent comments. And if you, for even one second, believe that comparing NASCAR to flushing skittles down a toilet or comparing NASCAR racing to McDonalds in terms of fine cuisine is intelligent reasoning, then that's a whole other discussion which does not need to be put on NAM.

And to clarify, YOU have given reasons for not liking NASCAR which I claim as unintelligent.

 

As stated, "vs" was the wrong word to use for this thread. I just wanted a discussion between the two.

Yes, NASCAR was described as "not" racing. See the second post. My "general consensus..." comment was confirmed with a "Yes". And then shortly thereafter the "NASCAR is to racing as McDonald's is to fine cuisine" which I am PRETTY sure that McDonalds is not fine cuisine. I put two and two together.

Sway me?? Sway me from what?? I'm just trying to defend NASCAR as legitimate form of racing where others are too proud or too scared to even consider it racing.

 

I'm not trying to sway you.

However, you place those who might not share your POV in a negative light. We're either "too proud, "not courageous," "not intelligent"

I already answered your question.

 

The initial question was what the thought of NASCAR was. The thread went the way it did because of ridiculous comments starting with the second post. The rest of the thread was a way for me to GAIN AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE OTHER PERSPECTIVE! I have been trying to figure out why it is not racing. I have gotten reasons as to why people don't like it, but I don't think liking NASCAR and not considering it racing correlate.

No, I don't want to know why one follows a sport over another. That's far FAR from the point. I guess it's completely dependent on a persons definition of racing. Maybe I need to start a new thread called "Defining Racing".

Although I have to ask this question and I hope you'll answer: Do YOU consider NASCAR racing?

 

To play along . . .

Road racing encompasses more of what I consider to be the "art" of driving than oval racing does. I'd say 75% of this has more to do with braking than acceleration.

F1 is my personal pinnacle of road racing, but I also consider the WRC to be road racing as well. I guess one could say Moto GP is, too. I have enormous respect for those who compete in the WRC as well as other forms of road racing, F1 just happens to be my favorite. I think that in many ways F1 remains the toughest form of motorsport to succeed in.

It has little to do with whether NASCAR builds road races into their schedule, I simply don't believe that the throngs of drivers who compete in NASCAR are put to the same test.

I feel that "racing" is much more than just "passing" I feel that it is much, much harder to overtake another car on a road course than on an oval. Whether this is true or not, I'll still take one pass in F1 over six dozen of the variety witnessed in any given NASCAR event.

Purely speaking as a spectator, I'd rather go to a circuit cut through rolling hill and dale than to a stadium. I don't care for ovals. Overall I prefer open wheel . . .

I'm not trying to sway anyone . . . I just love F1 and have for almost 34 years.

 

delete

 

I think a lot of it has to do with what a particular viewer finds interesting. Take quarter-mile racing as an example (bracket-racing in particular). Some people might find two cars going in a straight line exceedingly dull, but when you consider that the margin of victory is often in the hundredths of a second, some people appreciate the precision and timing involved, as well as the necessity for consistency run after run so you don't break out of your bracket.

Likewise, some people (like me) really like autocrossing for the low cost of entry and the technical/handling aspects, even though the speeds involved aren't that high (it's a rare course layout that lets me get over 55 MPH, even on the straights). But someone else might dismiss autocrossing out-of-hand just because it's not wheel-to-wheel racing and you don't have any direct interaction between the competitors.

In short, I don't think there are any valid arguments to be made regarding whether or not NASCAR, F1, or any other automotive competition are "real" racing, but I think people *can* make valid arguments about why they prefer watching (or participating) in one versus the other.

For me, I don't like watching *any* kind of racing (or any sports in general), because I'm not emotionally-invested enough to give a crap about the players involved, the rivalries, or anything going on behind the scenes, like rule changes, infractions/investigations, etcetera.

Stripped of the surrounding context, I find televised sports of all kinds to be dull.

 

It is completely unfair for you to claim that if people don't share in my point of view that I am calling them unintelligent. That's insulting. The COMMENTS are unintelligent. Believe it or not, this thread was started to generate positive discussion on racing.

 

That is very well said! "Real" racing could be discussed all day as the definition varies from person to person. But it's really frustrating when one form of racing, in this case NASCAR, shares many of the same components as F1, yet NASCAR is dismissed as not even a form of racing. That's insulting to not only NASCAR fans but to all of the teams that make up NASCAR.

 

THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR!!!!!!!!!! You're simply stating what your preference is and giving VALID reasons for why you enjoy watching it and HAVE enjoyed it for 34 years.

What I noticed in your post is that you are essentially comparing racing to racing. NASCAR is NOT your favorite and that is completely fine. But you're not bashing it, you're not saying it's NOT racing, etc.

Man, this is what I wanted all along. I wish it hadn't taken so long to get to this point.

 

Well, taking the literal standpoint (I'm an engineer, what do you expect?), I don't think that anyone is seriously arguing that NASCAR isn't "racing". At its heart, it's a contest to see who can travel a fixed distance in the shortest amount of time, and unlike the "bag of Skittles" analogy, the outcome is *not* random. That pretty much makes it "racing", by any reasonable definition.

All the rest of it boils down to the fact that people have differing (yet valid) opinions on what makes a race "exciting", or what makes one form of racing more "challenging" than the others.

Face it, if NASCAR weren't "real" racing, or was somehow inferior or required less talent than other forms of racing, then some well-funded competitor from one of the other racing communities would just switch to NASCAR and completely dominate every race (I'm laughing, thinking about the Frenchman from "Talladega Nights" as I type this). Since that hasn't happened, I suspect that NASCAR is as challenging as other forms of auto racing, just in different areas.

 

Be back in a little bit. There's some drag racing on right now. *Ooooh, Ashley Force.

 

sigh... yet another woman who would be "cute" to "somewhat pretty" in just about any other setting is suddenly a goddess just because she's in motorsports. AOL's "Hottest Athlete"? Really??



Come on - she's a driver - concentrate on her abilities, not her looks. And if you have to make a sex-symbol out of someone, suck it up and realize that you need to go *outside* of motorsports.

 

OK, well speaking of NASCAR, did anyone watch the Phoenix race last night?

All the other leaders pitted for fuel and tires in the last 12 laps except Jimmy Johnson.

No one thought he could go all the way - which is exactly what he did to win the race. Well done, JJ and crew - outfoxed them again!

Now some would argue that a "fuel economy" race is uninteresting, but he came from well back in the pack, did the same number of laps as everyone else, ran as hard or harder, and still managed to save enough gas to do backward laps and burnouts as well as go al the way to the end.

 

Equivocating. Splitting hairs this fine, doesn't change your posts, and what can be inferred from them.

You start a thread and use a name that is confrontational. "NASCAR vs. Formula 1." You can't get more confrontational than that. Then you argue about your intention with starting this thread.

Then you say my comments, and possibly others, are unintelligent. No, they weren't. You just didn't like them. Mine might have been humorous or somewhat sarcastic, but they weren't unintelligent. So you decide to become personally insulting with your view of the comments.... which came as a result of your confrontational thread name.

In legalese, it's call the poisoned fruit of the tree. You planted it.

Enjoy NASCRAP (that's what I call it.) and be happy. But if you pop up with a "this vs that" thread, you're going to stir the pot.

 

WRC, NASCAR, F1, Indy Car, Dakar, Friday night stocks, karting, school bus demo derby... I watch 'em all. Heck, you'd probably find me watching HO-track racing on the tube if there was such a show. To each his own.

I have a #8 Dale Jr hat that I wear sometimes, and the comments that it draws include both the foolish and the ignorant. It's all racing, boys. And thank Zeus for it. If all of us dug the same kind of racing, the racing world just wouldn't be the same.

Now, why SPEED dropped WRC, we'll never know. Absolutely foolish. I would pay to get WRC coverage on TV ...

 

And when was F1 last at the Glen? 1980?

I was just pointing out that F1 fans are not only natural fibers and expensive cars.

Rich

 

As I mentioned before, the "vs" was a mistake. My intention was just to be a discussion between the two. I edited the first post with the title to take that into account, but apparently editing the title there does not change it in the "forum" screen.

 

Maybe you should have made them cheaky and fun. No eeevvvviiillll shenanighans.

 

I thought that was the best Phoenix race to date. It was a huge gamble and even though he was 20 seconds ahead, it was entertaining to listen to his crew chief say "slow down SLOW DOWN" for the last 4 laps. He was either going to win, or end up the last car on the lead lap. That was a nail-biter and lots of fun to watch.

 

I'll take a F1 race any day of the week, but during their long breaks, I watch the Rolex/GT series. NASCAR...I only watch for the wrecks and the last 25 laps.

 

Perhaps I should be letting this thread lie low, but if anyone saw the Monday night Top Gear, I thought it provided one answer to this question.

Hammond, who I assume is a better driver than many if not most of the people on NAM, had a hard time handling a V10 F1 car [one of Alonso's from Renault, I think?]. I -- again -- assume that most of us could basically handle a NASCAR car, but the F1s are in a totally different league.

That's one reason F1 is more interesting to me, at least. It is at such an extreme, so beyond the norm, something difficult to imagine doing. So there is a fascination to see what these drivers can do.

 

vintage racing is where it's at. Heck, even some of the original trans-am racers our out there in a vintage series.

Cars have come a long way, and now without tons of rules they are basically to fast, too powerful and handle too well for mere mortals to drive. So to keep everyone from dying, you get the rule bound racing series that are what state of the art racing has become.

Sure, it's competitive, and sure, it takes huge amounts of skill to win. But I'm finding I like touring car classes, vintage racing and the "drive what you brung" stuff that's more of a grass roots effort.

I'm liking the club efforts, things that are approacable for people who aren't millionaires and the like. But I do like watching pretty much anything. Heck, I even watched some dirt drags a few days ago! They only go 300 feet in about 2.5 seconds with top speeds of about 150 mph, but 100 foot dirt rooster tails! It's impressive, but WTF, I'd really rather watch 1950s Alfas going for it.

At the last moterey pre-historics (this is a free to attend race a week or so before the historics), I just love the series when you have Minis, Lotus 7s, Mustangs, cobras, and Ferraris all on the track at the same time! That's some fun to watch for sure.

But both Nascar (superspeedways) and F1 (no passing races) have thier boring venues. They have thier pluses and minuses as well. They all do the best they can within the rule envelope that they are given. That's racing!

Matt