From the way I read this, Robin Miller seems to be saying that Paul Tracy was owed the championship because of the way he ran in past seasons?
"People are saying Tracy didn't beat anybody and, while it's obvious CART's competition lacks its previous depth and talent, let's not forget those old days. P.T. was the first guy to challenge Michael Andretti's superiority in the early '90s and he always had the stats and stones to be a champion. He simply lacked the discipline. Yes, he should have won the title this year because of his experience and his team. But don't discredit his accomplishment. He consistently beat the best when CART was at full strength and he just took care of unfinished business in 2003."
Is that a backhanded compliment or what?
Also, I wonder if the lack of ovals played into Tracy's favor this year?
He has always run better on the road courses and the short oval/handling type of tracks.
"People are saying Tracy didn't beat anybody and, while it's obvious CART's competition lacks its previous depth and talent, let's not forget those old days. P.T. was the first guy to challenge Michael Andretti's superiority in the early '90s and he always had the stats and stones to be a champion. He simply lacked the discipline. Yes, he should have won the title this year because of his experience and his team. But don't discredit his accomplishment. He consistently beat the best when CART was at full strength and he just took care of unfinished business in 2003."
Is that a backhanded compliment or what?
Also, I wonder if the lack of ovals played into Tracy's favor this year?
He has always run better on the road courses and the short oval/handling type of tracks.
Comment