Pavement died when the same car wasn't used for both IMHO. Granted I've been to about four pavement races in my life. A Cora Midgets at Queen City early 80s which was ok not bad racing, Staab's win at IRP. Kinda liked this one as it was standard sprints and there were some slide jobs. Mostly because I helped with the car a bit, the winner was my local track champ and through a series of things there were many lead changes.
Winchester after a obvious rule change early to mid 90s, Dave Steele in a car that looked like anything but a sprint car laps up to third, Second a half lap back. I can appreciate the discipline but the racing sucked.
Little 500 2017. Six or seven car pack of cars running very close most of the race, Others moving up. Stratagy gaining mass positions or losing. Different car being the fastest at different times during the race, Multiple leaders and lead changes, And while the finish wasn't very close, a couple laps more and Santo's would have made close as he'd made up 3/4th's of a lap in the last ten laps..
That, The fact that the track looks imposible to race three wide on, yet they do and do often, The circus that is the pits, Push trucks pushing off under green etc. It's so much action, it's hard to keep track of everything.
Only dang thing I didn't like about it was the totally crappy PA and the fact I had to used the RR for about the last hour but held out.
And the number one reason Pavement got to sucking. 12 car counts, Honestly, Even if they do have a good race, How does that compete with 4-5 heats two consi's and a feature? Companies base their purchase on Return on Investment (ROI) why wouldn't a fan? I know to travel over two hours to something, it has to be much better than a closer dirt option. I thought the little 500 lived up to that.
Little 500 had about 38 last year, 47 for this year and im guessing about 10-12 of those cars and drivers were perfectly capable of winning. Strategy, execution and a little luck wins it.