Originally Posted by richie:
Marlboro sponsorship came aboard in 1971 for the USAC championship trail. Dirt tracks were subsequently dropped as an appeasement to the demands of the sponsorship. Dirt was taken off the National championship schedule and spun-off into its own "Dirt Championship" division, now known as Silver Crown.
Marlboro wanted exclusivity on their sponsorship of USAC as the only cigarette signage in the series. However, the Viceroy cars came along with the Vel's Parnelli Jones team the following year in 1972. Marlboro wasn't happy with that aspect and left USAC after just one year. However, the dirt tracks never came back on board the "IndyCar" schedule, more than likely due to the now "higher-end" sponsors in the sport who shied away from the dirt tracks, which did not have the amenities to cater to what the potential big time sponsors were looking for at the time in the early 1970s, as compared to say, Formula One.
Also, not ironically, Winston Cigarettes became the NASCAR Grand National Series title sponsor the same year as Marlboro went to USAC in 1971 - it was the very same year that NASCAR also took dirt tracks off the "Cup" schedule.
Cliff's note version. It was Marlboro who kickstarted this whole deal.
So, the vitriol we've all seen and heard concerning Penske, Patrick, et al, being the culprit's to blame for the separation is misguided and misdirected?
All this took place just a smidgen before my time of over indulgence into the nuances and details of open wheel championship racing but the Marlboro aspect is a somewhat compelling explaination.
Silver Crown Championship Dirt Cars properly driven on a one mile dirt track are classic poetry in motion. Using that analogy, Jack Hewitt is one of the greatest poets of all time.
Originally Posted by Joe Schaub:
Dan Gurney's now infamous "White Paper" started the rift and the progression of more pavement racing and the disdain for two radical chassis's ultimately lead to it.
It could have all be stopped in 1961 had USAC banned the Cooper Climax at Indy.
Gurney's White Paper was penned in early 1978 and had nothing to do with dirt versus asphalt and everything to do with the financial potential of the series. But, yeah, I know, the truth always gets in the way of a good Penske bashing and a story about how evil furriners and nancy boy road racers wanted to ruin the Indy 500.
Originally Posted by Joe Schaub:
Oh great one, thoust has bequeathed upon thyne little peasant thoust knowledge.
I bow to thee. ..l.. ..l..
All you had to do was present your post and not be a ******.
Explain to us all how a document meant to rally other owners into coming together to push for greater financial success of the series was a catalyst for a decision made almost a decade prior to Gurney's penning it...............I might be an a**** for doing it, but you bet I'm going to call you out on that one, because it's absolutely absurd.
Originally Posted by Joe Schaub:
Dan Gurney's now infamous "White Paper" started the rift and the progression of more pavement racing and the disdain for two radical chassis's ultimately lead to it.
It could have all be stopped in 1961 had USAC banned the Cooper Climax at Indy.
Gurney's White Paper was penned in early 1978 and had nothing to do with dirt versus asphalt and everything to do with the financial potential of the series. But, yeah, I know, the truth always gets in the way of a good Penske bashing and a story about how evil furriners and nancy boy road racers wanted to ruin the Indy 500.
Originally Posted by Joe Schaub:
Happy now? It must take a seriously sad person to act like you did.
May you find peace in your life so you can stop protecting your rage onto others.
No, what's sad is pointing out those very facts on here before only to be called a Penske shill or a angry former CART employee, something I've dealt with plenty of times before. It's not my fault the sarcasm of the furriner and Penske comment went over your head. Two seconds on Google would have brought you to a copy of the white paper on Gurney's AAR website and within in the first sentence of the write up on the paper it tells you when it was written which would have told you it had nothing to do with the 1971 schedule. I've lost count of how many times over the years someone affiliated with CART has been blamed for something USAC did because people would rather tell a tall tale based on emotion rather than actually research it. Case in point the 1994 Indy 500 and the Mercedes-Ilmor. No matter how many times you show well sourced info that USAC wrote the rule, admits the engine was well within the confines of the rule, and no one "exploited a loophole" it's still pushed by a segment of the racing fan community that Penske cheated his way to 500 glory, 'cause you know, those evil CART roady racers.
You're only calling it sarcasm because someone called you out for your behavior. I'm done with this back and forth with you.
My behavior? I'm not the one filling my diaper or sending vitriolic IM's because someone set me straight with a sourced fact. That's OK, keep being you, and I'll keep being me, a person who's not holding some 50 year old grudge over the series no longer running the many great dirt tracks this great US of A has to offer.
