Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Revisionist History II ?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Revisionist History II ?

    web page

    Previously, TF member jjjanos was taken to task here for obvious and compelling omissions in an article that said it was time for TG to clarify the vision of the IRL. The countering opinion expressed here was that the vision was very clear. The IRL had created opportunity and excitement, as required: the rest is up to the fans and the individual teams.

    The new article (link above) is seemingly a response to those challenges, but remains a seriously flawed attempt to re-write history. The rhetoric it depends on will be familiar to readers of 7G .

    The artcle basically says up front that there are two possible reasons for the existence of the IRL: either CART wasn't taking care of the oval racing fans, or it was all a sinister TG conspiracy without merit. The balance of the article attempts to refute the former reason, leaving the reader to conclude that the latter is all that's left.

    I suggest that CART indeed did not properly attend to oval racing, and that the reasons for the IRL's existence are the plain and simple facts as declared- to control costs and provide a focus on the U.S. oval racing market.

    Recent history supports this position, and doesn't require subscription to conspiracy theories (also known as "conjecture" and "hearsay" ).

    The article states that "There is no evidence that CART would not have expanded its schedule to include new oval venues if the IRL had not been formed." There is also no evidence that they would- in fact, many of the recently added ovals appear to have been hastily acquired in direct response to the creation of the IRL.

    In any case, there is little disagreement among knowledgable fans and professionals alike that CART's oval racing product has long been compromised by the road racing influence. Adding more events did not improve the quality and/or viability of CART's oval racing, especially in light of their apparent evolution in emphasis towards a business model based on competing with F1 and away from U.S. oval racing.

    One only needs to listen to CART's best oval racers, like Michael Andretti, to know that they ruined the racing at Naz, Homestead, and even The Mile; that Michigan and Fontana were Handfordized into oblivion; and that oval racing at other venues became literally impossible (like TMS). This was the logical extension of an environment dating back to the mid 1980's.

    In addition, the entire connection and appeal of CART's oval racing to that of the rest of the U.S. oval racing scene was completely broken. To paraphrase Railbird, the best justification of the IRL is the fact that Joe Gibbs even knows who Tony Stewart is .

    These facts just don't support jjjanos' position that CART did everything an oval racing fan could have hoped for. If they did, there very well would have been no split, and the exodus of fans from Indy cars to NASCAR might have been mitigated.

    As for the article's alternate conclusion that the creation of the IRL was a sinister plot to 'bust a union', again, the simpler solution (and one borne out by the facts) is that the creation of the IRL was, as declared, to ensure the viability of oval racing at the Indy 500 and beyond by controlling costs, focussing on the on-track product, and understanding the appeal of the U.S. open wheel oval racing market.

    This simpler solution is supported by the facts that 1) these are exactly the things that the IRL has done and 2) these are exactly the things that CART failed to do. The success of one clearly defines the shortcomings of the other.

    Simple .
    "Each day well lived makes every yesterday a dream of happiness and every tomorrow a vision of hope. Look well therefore to this one day for it, and it alone, is life"
    ~ Sanskrit poem attributed to Kalidasa, "Salutation to the Dawn"


    Brian's Wish

  • #2
    The author shows his bias and undermines his own credibility completely in the third paragraph:

    By 1991 Mr. George, on behalf of the IMS, had effectively demanded complete
    control of CART.
    I stopped reading right there. I knew where the article was going and suspected that I had already had this argument with him somewhere online in the past.

    Professor Joe
    Lost in Indy

    "So many of these guys know how to preserve their tires, how to handle traffic and how to win a race. They really deserve to be in Indy cars." - Bob East

    Comment


    • #3
      As with all CARTisans,this guy is following the party line.Jeez!And they call us lemmings.
      Proud to be a complainer.

      Comment


      • #4
        Same old, same old.............

        Here is a look at the numbers:

        Cart 1995 Season "Pre-Spilt"

        16 Cart scantioned Races plus Indy for a 17 race season. 6 ovals and 11 road/street races


        Cart 1997 Season - Year of the 1st full IRL Season

        18 Cart scantioned Races

        7 ovals and 11 road/street races

        So, how were the oval racing fans severed by either of these schedules?

        And Cart in 1995 was very much light on the oval side, even when you include Indy.

        And the ONLY reason Cart counted points for the Indy 500 was due to the intervention of PPG's Jim Chapman when the 1st "war" broke out in 1980, remember?

        [ January 17, 2002: Message edited by: indyracer56 ]

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by indyracer56:
          <STRONG>And the ONLY reason Cart counted points for the Indy 500 was due to the intervention of PPG's Jim Chapman when the 1st "war" broke out in 1980, remember?</STRONG>
          Wasn't there at least one(1) year when they did not award points?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Eagle104:
            <STRONG>
            Wasn't there at least one(1) year when they did not award points?</STRONG>
            I think that was the case in both 1979 and 1980, does anyone remember???

            As a matter of fact, if I remember right, up until the formation of the IRL the Indy 500 winner was also the winner of USAC's Gold Crown championship. The Gold Crown was the one-race season consisting of the Indy 500!

            Remember how the cars would always have different numbers for the 500 as opposed to what they ran the rest of the season under Cart scantion?

            [ January 17, 2002: Message edited by: indyracer56 ]

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by indyracer56:
              <STRONG>

              As a matter of fact, if I remember right, up until the formation of the IRL the Indy 500 winner was also the winner of USAC's Gold Crown championship. The Gold Crown was the one-race season consisting of the Indy 500!

              Remember how the cars would always have different numbers for the 500 as opposed to what they ran the rest of the season under Cart scantion?

              </STRONG>
              Your taught me what I didn't realize about Jim Chapman's (points)influence. And reminded me of the USAC title.

              But, I can't recall much of the "different numbers". Doesn't mean it didn't happen...just can't recall.

              Comment


              • #8
                In my opinion, theIRL was NEEDED to counteract:

                1. Diminishing oval racing.
                2. A growing threat by CART to control Indy.
                3. Stop a revolving door lineup, a situation that still exists in the IRL, with the continuation of ride buying.

                The above is my opinion and mine alone. However, it is these very items that caused my allegiance, both TV and dollars, to move to Winston Cup.

                The IRL has taken care of points 1 and 2.

                [ January 17, 2002: Message edited by: hdolan ]

                Comment


                • #9
                  I think that the new numbers only stayed for a couple of years. When TG/IMS shared marketing with cart under the IndyCar banner, part of that was trying to make agreements on things like numbers. But, through the '80s the previous winner of the 500 had the option to use #1 the next year. I think that, in one of the years in the early '80s, they decided to offer the #1 to the combined winner of the Silver/Gold crown championship and Ziggy had the honor of being #1. So, A.J.'s backup car carried #1. I don't know if Ziggy qualified that car or not.

                  Professor Joe
                  Lost in Indy

                  "So many of these guys know how to preserve their tires, how to handle traffic and how to win a race. They really deserve to be in Indy cars." - Bob East

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Ok, Prof Joe. Thanks, guys.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I don't know why people can't just agree that George thought that Indy was the cornerstone of open wheel racing. He felt that he should have influence on open wheel racing in the U.S. because of that. When he wasn't given what he felt he should be given by CART he simply said I'll take my football and play my own game.

                      If they had worked together they could have accomplished a lot together. They didn't and the rest is history.
                      Man to Man is so unjust... there's no Man you can Trust.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Close, but not quite, Brickman.

                        TG did see CART attempting to dictate how the Indy was going to run. He didn't like the direction it was going, and CART wasn't willing to accept any input from him.

                        TG was in a position where if CART "boycotted" the Indy 500, the event was dead in water.

                        Racemind: Kim Kardashian Indy Watch : Twitter.com/racemind
                        "If NASCAR didn't want us to sleep through the race then why did they give us a COT?"

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          "TG was in a position where if CART "boycotted" the Indy 500, the event was dead in water."

                          The infamous 'White Paper' hinted at this possiblity...depending on one's perspective....

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            The biggest item here is that this is all past history. Tony George did what he did for whatever reason he had at the time. Those reasons no longer matter except to fans with an inability to let go of some imaginary injury to their psyche caused by TG.

                            IRL fans are glad Tony began our series while cart fans are still upset over it. They will get over it some day or they won't. Either way I don't care the slightest and will continue to enjoy the IRL and be more than happy with my kind of racing.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Sometimes in life, and in business, people are forced to make a decision that is best in the LONG RUN. It may be painful in the short term, but 20 years down the road you will be better off.

                              For example, you forgoe a job out of high school in order to put in four years of college. It may take you 10-15 years to make up the lost income, but it will be worth it in the long run.

                              Open Wheel Oval Indy Car racing will be much better off in the year 2010 than it would have been without the IRL.

                              I hope CART survives, and does well. But having an oval based series tied to the Indy 500, its premier event, makes sense, and has proven to work.

                              Comment

                              Unconfigured Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X