Following the 500 in the 50's/60's vs. the 00's...

[jp]

For those that attended the 500 back in the day, was it difficult to follow the action and know what exactly was going on on the track? Today, you have video boards and radio announcers that have access to second by second timing and scoring. Listening to the radio broadcasts from the 60's makes it's apparent that at times they were confused as to what was happening on the track.

jp

[stnkypete]

OK, I deleted my lame attempt at humor.

Any way, I used to listen to the race with my father on the radio in the 70's and I remember they had one guy at each corner and they'd "hand-off" the call through the lap. It recall them settling into a good rhythm as the race went on and I don't recall having a hard time tracking the race. But, I was young and it was a while ago.

[Rick Jones]

Part of what made the 500 interesting to watch in person back in the day was not being able to see everything as the jumbo-trons now allow us to do. This created a great deal of anticipation each lap, waiting to see who would be leading the next time around. It was exciting and I remember not being sold on the idea of video screens at first. They took some of the mystic away. Rushing home to see the replays was the icing on the cake after a good day of racing. Sitting in turn three it was always neat to go home and see what happened on the track elsewhere during the race.
Radios were not as sophisticated then as they are now and with the big head phones, and especially with scanners. I don't remember people in the stands listening to the race using radios. We relied on the PA to sort through what was going on, and then as with today, the PA was not that effective when cars were buzzing by. The score boards were often wrong, as they are sometimes today. I love the improvements with video and radio, but the oval seemed much bigger back in the day!

[Racing Truth]

Part of what made the 500 interesting to watch in person back in the day was not being able to see everything as the jumbo-trons now allow us to do. This created a great deal of anticipation each lap, waiting to see who would be leading the next time around. It was exciting and I remember not being sold on the idea of video screens at first. They took some of the mystic away. Rushing home to see the replays was the icing on the cake after a good day of racing. Sitting in turn three it was always neat to go home and see what happened on the track elsewhere during the race.
Radios were not as sophisticated then as they are now and with the big head phones, and especially with scanners. I don't remember people in the stands listening to the race using radios. We relied on the PA to sort through what was going on, and then as with today, the PA was not that effective when cars were buzzing by. The score boards were often wrong, as they are sometimes today. I love the improvements with video and radio, but the oval seemed much bigger back in the day!

Well, higher speeds have that effect, too. Ditto more grandstands (Petty, I think, once said that Daytona SEEMED much bigger when there were few grandstands.).

[Frank Capua]

I've notice the video boards but I keep my eyes on the track just like I did in the 50s and 60s. They are good for replays after a yellow but not when the track is green. I didn't pay that much to watch the race on TV.

And someone with those dagnabit headphones on is just one less person to talk about what we are seeing going on in front of us.

[PenelopePitstop]

And someone with those dagnabit headphones on is just one less person to talk about what we are seeing going on in front of us.

If something confusing happens, that someone with the dagnabit headphones is the one to turn to. Very often that's where the explanation is going to be found. No harm, no foul.

[Hardscrabble]

The funny thing about those with headphones...half the time it seems like they have less idea what's going in the race than those without...

[IndyDog]

[QUOTE=Rick Jones;2489930]Part of what made the 500 interesting to watch in person back in the day was not being able to see everything as the jumbo-trons now allow us to do. This created a great deal of anticipation each lap, waiting to see who would be leading the next time around. It was exciting and I remember not being sold on the idea of video screens at first. They took some of the mystic away.[/QUOTE]

Yep.

[badart]

The funny thing about those with headphones...half the time it seems like they have less idea what's going in the race than those without...

My brother (badmuzak) and I were accompanied by a buddy to the 92 Race. He had headphones for the first time and we (my bro and I) would be discussing the pit strategies, etc. A minute later, he would YELL (we can hear ya!) what we had just discussed. We finally told him to just shut up and listen.

[porscheman]

Not specific to the 500, but the advent of scanners and videoboards (mostly for replays and road courses) have greatly enhanced my race day experiences. And yes, I'm one of those dorks with the headphones ... but I damn sure know what's going on.



porscheman

[Bruce Spencer]

The funny thing about those with headphones...half the time it seems like they have less idea what's going in the race than those without...

I don't even go to the local speedways without my scanner, it immensely improves the racing experience.

[shifty]

To me, when you are hooked, your hooked. I was hooked every time i went to a race no matter where my source of information came from. I adapted to what I was learning just as I do today.

It's easier to get more info quickly today, but I was just as hooked then as now.

It is a good thought provoking question though.

[indyrjc]

Part of what made the 500 interesting to watch in person back in the day was not being able to see everything as the jumbo-trons now allow us to do. This created a great deal of anticipation each lap, waiting to see who would be leading the next time around. It was exciting and I remember not being sold on the idea of video screens at first.......

Interesting comment. And I remember that Parnelli Jones stated that at least part of the reason that the Ontario Motor Speedway failed was that there was no anticipation for the fans when it came to seeing who was leading each lap.

[numrounofan]

I don't think it's changed that much. Back in the day, you'd go to the race, then come home and watch it on TV. Only difference is now you DVR it. I do the same with football games. I love being there, but you miss all of the commentary. I record most of the games I attend and then when I get home I see if the announcers saw what I saw...

(comment on the jumbotrons, I like having them there, but I watch the race on the track. I was at the new Dallas Stadium last year and that screen is so big, you can't help but watch it. Really takes away from the game IMHO. The screens at INDY let you follow the action without being obtrusive)

[Joonyah]

As one of those with the dagnabit headphones, I must say it's very comical to listen to Brian Barnhart during the 500 every year.