Originally Posted by SC90:
I too understand the problem, but politely asking the teams not to be competitive for the sake of everyone saving money isn't going to work.
1. What happened to the days of getting a couple of shows out of a RR tire?
Answer: When a team realized they weren't competitive because the competition was tacking on new RR's at every opportunity. The rules didn't stop them from doing it, so they do what they can to win!
2. What happened to the days of USAC stamping the RR, and you qualified and ran the feature on that very same RR?
Answer: Good question. Why doesn't USAC stamp the RR anymore? It would be a way to save money, and ALL teams would have to abide by the rule.
3. Why are today's RR tires for dirt and pavement junk or almost junk, after just 1 show?
Answer: Good question. Why not ask Hoosier? The teams don't make the tires. I imagine Hoosier sells more tires if they are junk after 1 show.
4. What happened to the days of the sprint car chassis that ran on dirt and pavement?
Answer: It wasn't competitive on either surface as a pavement-only chassis is on pavement and a dirt-only chassis is on dirt. Racers want to win. That's why they are there, and that's why the fans show up. The sanctioning body doesn't have a rule that limits chassis to combo cars only. Until the sanctioning body sets the rules, the teams will do whatever they can to win, win, win.
Please understand that I'm not picking on you, but the drivers/teams are competitive and will do whatever they can to win. If they don't really care if they win or not, then they shouldn't be there.
When I first started to get into racing, I got some good advice from the principal of one of the winningest teams in open wheel:
"It is very expensive to run at the back."
No team is making money coming in last. The purse for last place usually doesn't even cover the cost of pit passes or the fuel to get to the track.
Changing the rules is easy. It takes about 5 seconds to write a rule limiting the number of tires a team can use during 1 race. The sanctioning body should write the rule that all teams must follow. Simple.
Answer to #1- The tire companies figured out that some car owners would buy more tires if they figured they could get a couple of tenths a lap from a new tire....then other car owners said, hey, those guys are a couple of tenths faster than us. So now they all buy new tires.
Answer to #2- The answer to #1. Guys wanted that extra couple of tenths a lap. Plus, the tire compounds had changed, and wouldn't hold up anymore.
Answer to #3- check out the answer to #2.
Answer to #4- The owners had to have asked USAC to allow the specialized cars. Up into the mid-late 70's, most teams used the exact same chassis for dirt and pavement (and several of those chassis were a few years old, not new every year, or a couple of times a year) Then the roadster showed up. When the upright chassis struggled to beat the roadster, the roadster was banned. Then at some point the pavement only chassis showed up again, but it was an upright....why that was allowed, only the owners from that time and USAC, knows.
I fully understand the competitive deal...trust me. I never went on the track 'hoping to run 10th'. But with what we spent, when we ran 3rd, we 'made more' than the guy that won, by the time you take into account all of the tires they were buying, the new chassis they had each year, etc, etc.
Racing never has been 'cheap', but how does constantly spending more than you could win, just to win, make sense??
It is expensive to run in the back. But apparently several car owners have decided it has gotten too expensive, to even run at all...........
I'm thinking the exact same problem is killing the pavement midget deal too.