I watched the first round of the 2008 NASCAR season yesterday – the Daytona 500.
I’m not a big fan of the style of racing but I’ve got a list as long as my arm of the things F1 can learn from NASCAR’s presentation.
What F1 can learn from NASCAR…
Loads more cameras – F1 uses a few distant, wide-angle cameras to cover the races, and a couple of high-mounted on-board cameras.
NASCAR has stacks of on-board cameras (admittedly it’s easier to fit them to big stock cars), static wall cameras that shake as the cameras pass, helicopter and blimp cameras, and cameras in the floor to show the cars zipping past. It gets the most out of the spectacle.
Team radio – Constant chatter from the teams and drivers was fed throughout the NASCAR broadcast – even a discussion between two team mates at one point.
F1 teams are allowed to withhold their conversations from the airwaves – which Ferrari and McLaren make heavy use of. The radios should be open and free for TV stations to use and fans at the track to listen to.
Talk about the history – before the race they had the drivers pick their favourite moments from past Daytona 500s and why they liked them. F1 should do this more – and Ecclestone shouldn’t be so stingy about letting TV companies use the footage to illustrate it.
High definition – NASCAR has it, F1 doesn’t. F1 needs to get this sorted now.
…and what it should ignore
Constant interruptions – If you think F1 gets a lot of interruptions (up to 15 minutes of adverts per race) NASCAR has much more.
Happily the UK broadcast on Sky didn’t cut away to adverts on every occasion the American feed inserted them, but on top of the breaks the commentators even take time out from talking about the action to plug various products. No thanks.
Boogity – Many UK F1 fans think ITV commentator James Allen is annoying. They probably wouldn’t if they had to put up with Darrell Waltrip shouting “boogity boogity boogity” every weekend.
Four hour races – Everyone told me not to judge NASCAR on the Daytona 500 alone and I can see why. Nothing happens for 180 laps, then there’s a couple of crashes and it finishes. Hmm.
Photo copyright: Daimler
More on NASCAR and F1
37 comments on “What F1 can learn (and forget) about NASCAR”
18th February 2008, 17:51
I 2nd the radio comment… not only is it much more available on TV.. but if you actually attend a race they hand out flyers with the frequencies of all in-car radio’s listed. Just bring your own scanner & tune in :)
This whole notion goes much further than just the radio though. It’s not uncommon to see reporters interviewing team bosses while the race is going on. Could you just imagine an actual interview with Ron Dennis after a particular pit stop last year? Not only would it happen in NASCAR, it would be considered rude if he didn’t .
Of course… as you said… they get a many more things very wrong. The prevalence of full-course cautions (i.e. safety car periods) is preposterous. Sometimes I think they just throw the yellow because it’s been 30 laps since the last one. There’s also a seeming requirement that they all last a MINIMUM of at least 5 laps (@ 30-60mph)… in order to ensure adequate time for commercial breaks.
18th February 2008, 18:22
I agree with everything you said. The visual coverage is good enough to make a boring sport entertaining. Accessibility is big, too. I love the idea of getting comments from the teams as the race is going on. You can get the races in Hi-Def, and subscribe to/buy channels on pay per view to “ride along” with top drivers. I believe this is similar to what was available on the “premier” channel in Germany several years ago. Formula One could learn a lot about quality coverage from most other sports, not just NASCAR.
If Bernie is forcing night races for higher tv audiences, surely they can improve the coverage for those viewers?
18th February 2008, 18:30
NASCAR has mastered the show for American Racing. At Daytona you can buy a pit pass and get within about 30 feet of the pits to watch. Sure the sport is boring but its cool to hear drivers sound off. I love F1 but they have to spice it up for the crowd.
Don’t get me wrong. I loved seeing KIMI blast to 1st and never look back in Australia of 2007, but more driver battles would be great.
If you are ever being chased by a Nascar just turn right and you will get away.
23rd February 2009, 17:04
They do run a a couple of road races. Just thought I would throw that in. And there are quite a few drivers who have turned right in there racing career.
18th February 2008, 18:48
the radio is indeed fun. Definatly at the end when you could here teammates speak to eachother, it’s great.
In F1 it was fun to hear the radio from Renault, too bad Ferrari and McLaren don’t like it. They should make it all open.
18th February 2008, 18:59
“This whole notion goes much further than just the radio though. It’s not uncommon to see reporters interviewing team bosses while the race is going on. Could you just imagine an actual interview with Ron Dennis after a particular pit stop last year?”
ITV did have a good phase a couple of years ago where it would pick a high-up team member (e.g. Dennis, Williams, Gascoyne, Brawn etc.) and interview them from the pit wall at certain points during the race to get updates on how their drivers were doing, and how the race overall was unfolding. Unfortunately that died a death, for reasons I don’t know.
Indy used one or two of those static wall cameras that shake as the cars go by, in the USGP’s – those are great, a real sensation of speed from them. I can’t think of anywhere else except maybe Canada that uses them in F1, though I suppose there’s not many F1 tracks with walls nearby high speed sections.
I agree about the TV coverage – that is what NASCAR gets right. Endless caution periods that effectively render the race meaningless till the last few laps – that’s what they get wrong. Even a spin, avoiding the wall, avoiding damage, brings out a caution that lasts a good few laps.
18th February 2008, 19:21
I’, fully agree with you! Team’s radio would be open!!
18th February 2008, 19:43
If I could, I would like to add a few things that NASCAR does right that F1 could learn from…
1: Web presentation: NASCAR in terms of their internet and new media presentation is miles ahead of F1. Just look at what nascar.com offers compared to formula1.com. No wonder there are so many NASCAR fans in America, the people at the top make it so accessible that anyone can follow it. Compare that with F1 where you have to go to several blogs to figure what the heck is going on. It is absolutely insane.
2: Slipstreaming: The one thing I do enjoy about NASCAR is that slipstreaming is a major part of overtaking. I know with the aerodynamics of the current F1 cars and the FIA paranoia of straight roads that there is no way this is coming back, but it is nice to have some variety in overtaking.
3: More flexibility with teams and cars: One thing nice about NASCAR is that they do have more cars in the field. Some of the smaller teams have one car out there and some teams have four cars. I personally wouldn’t mind if F1 open it up a bit with some of the “poorer” putting there resources into one car instead of splitting an already meager budget on two. Also, if Ferrari and McLaren want to put up to four cars in the field so be it, better competition. That way, we can have a proper grid of about (or more than) 24 cars.
4: More advertising opportunities: I know, I know, I know: we all hate advertisement and yes… the amount at the Daytona 500 was extremely annoying. It not that bit I am getting at, I am talking about the different relationship between the teams, the sport, and advertisers. By allowing advertisers to sponsor cars instead of teams, there is more opportunity to bring more potential advertisers in the fold. Not only that, but it would really break up the blandness of the colors of the cars on the grid.
5: Management: I will take the France family and the lot who run NASCAR over BernieMax any day and twice on Sundays. The fact that they can turn a sport of rednecks driving in circles into one of the leading sports in America is an amazing achievement. They are sharp, they produce a great product, they are not afraid of what new, aren’t afraid to innovate, and they have set the sport up for long term sustainability and success. Imagine with the same resources that F1 has what these guys could do to the sport on a global scale.
18th February 2008, 19:45
The overt product placement is enough to keep me entertained :)
Here come the field behind the Chevrolet pace car.. [pause]
Chevrolet, who have been controlling the pace of Nascar for 50 years… [pause]
Chevrolet… an American Revolution.
18th February 2008, 20:35
I’ve really enjoyed reading the couple of posts on NASCAR, it’s interesting to read comments on NASCAR from non-Americans that amounts to more than “you guys suck” =).
I had been wondering if you guys would get the American TV commentators (Darrell Waltrip, et al) or your own commentators, thnks for clearing that up. All of the broadcasters for all of the networks are annoying in their own way, but the FOX guys (who covered Daytona) are actually the most knowledgeable. I tire of the good ol’ boy schtick, but they are better than the BNC guys and much, much, much better than the ABC guys (who had been led by Rusty Wallace(*) last year, who ended up being so bad that they’ve already announced he’s getting kicked out of the booth when Dale Jarrett retires from racing and becomes available).
If you guys are still watching when ABC gets the races, there’s one thing worth watching for. They have this thing where, when the cars come to take the green, they open multiple radio channels to the broadcast at once. It sounds cheesy, but it gives me goosebumps. Listening to the drivers, crew chiefs, and spotters for 43 teams try to get up to speed without killing each other is a very visceral reminder of the work that goes into every second of a race.
(*) in 2006, after Rusty Wallace had retired but before ABC had any NASCAR broadcasts, they put him in the Indy Racing League booth with Scott Goodyear. I have a friend who started watching IRL only for the Schadenfruede of how awful those two were together. It was the worst commentating pair I’ve ever heard in any sport…
19th February 2009, 3:22
It’s not so much of the “you guys suck!” mantra, it’s the generational high-brow, elitist ways that is indicative of much of Europe (as it relates to F1), that makes F1 appear stagnant and aloof in many ways.
When F1 doesn’t have the intimacy and interaction with most of its fans–while NASCAR does–then the solution is obvious. However, given the European attitude and those in charge of F1, I wouldn’t count on much change. (By the way, I’m of European descent, so I’m not looking to disparage Europe, but rather point out the microcosm that is FI vs. NASCAR/Europe vs. America.
18th February 2008, 21:02
Although I’m not a NASCAR fan, I was kinda tempted to watch it this weekend. Unfortunately I couldn’t find anyone with Sky, but if I’m honest, I didn’t try that hard.
As far as I can tell, the number one complaint in this house is the stickers in place of headlights. Something odd about pretending to have lights when you don’t.
18th February 2008, 21:05
Note that we keep blaming Bernie – and so we should. But the little geezer is too busy these days arranging for new and more sensational GPs to worry about how the races are presented. There are too many jobs involved in this for any man, no matter how tiny and over-imbued with energy, to cope with adequately. Let Bernie do what he likes (if we have to keep him) which is hobnobbing with sheikhs and pashas and let the broadcasting professionals work out how they want to present the races.
Yes, I know everything in sight is owned by CVC and Bernie is their representative but, if they want to stop making a loss, they need to attend to things like the presentation of the sport.
18th February 2008, 21:12
i miss the stockcarzone dearly.
last season was pretty damn amazing and if it was on free-to-air tv again this year, i might try to follow.
what nascar has now, f1 will have in several year’s time. just look at kangaroo tv.
f1 is, was, and always will be years behind in this area.
18th February 2008, 21:46
Scootin159 – “The prevalence of full-course cautions (i.e. safety car periods) is preposterous.”
Unless you chose to qualify that statement (i.e. note only 2 of 36 events are held on road courses) I would suggest even you wouldn’t much care to be part of a safety crew or a driver of a disabled car would be in favor of 180mph cars conducting a “race” in three corners and have to slow for an “area caution” for one single corner. And that corner being in many cases less than a mile and 10-25 seconds away.
The safety ramifications of that are well, “preposterous.”
18th February 2008, 22:58
well i do recieve the original broadcast voices of waltrip etc… can’t say it’s that bad…
18th February 2008, 23:04
lol … this discussion is fascinating to me, as I love both F1 and NASCAR equally — just for very different reasons.
I wish some of you wouldn’t tune out of NASCAR entirely, however, especially as a result of yesterday’s Daytona 500.
The “COT” is an abomination, and the true culprit for the race being “180 laps, a couple of crashes, and then the finish.” I’ve never seen a more boring restrictor plate race in my life — so, please trust me … it’s not the way it’s supposed to be, and won’t be until they either fix that horrible creation, or scrap it and get back to “stock cars” — or at least a reasonable fascimile thereof.
I’m highly critical of NASCAR as a sanctioning body, and the COT is merely its latest blunder … but, in truth, while I love F1 passionately, there used to be absolutely nothing like watching 43 … then 39 … then 25 (lol) cars doin’ 190mph in about the space you could throw a tent over — when fenders were more “navigation tools” than body parts, grin …
Talledega is another superspeedway race that will no doubt be as compromised by the COT as Daytona’s race was yesterday, at least until they figure out how to make these new flyin’-brick-squished-blowfish lookin’ things actually RACE … and it’s a true pity. I’m not a fan of restrictor plates, though they’re there for safety — otherwise, they’d be running the same way at well over 200mph, and the real danger is to the crowd when they wreck … and, unfortunately, they will wreck.
Regardless of what many open-wheel purists believe, it does take great skill and endurance to drive at the Cup level — it simply requires a different type of hand/eye coordination, instinct and all-out fearlessness. I wish that those who are and/or who remain skeptical about NASCAR’s status as a motorsport would look past the “moonshine runner origins”, grin … stay a bit patient with it until you watch it more often (just as I had to with open-wheel, before I came to appreciate its own unique attributes). And, holy crap — at least try to live through this COT debacle with the rest of us, lol, as it’s simply NOT stock car racing as it’s meant to be.
As far as the headlight comment? lol – hilarious! They used to be real, ya’ know, but, really — when you’re using your front-end that much to either bump-draft or simply bump-wreck, grin, doesn’t really seem to be much of a point to having all that glass on the track by lap 2, does there?
18th February 2008, 23:11
I found the coverage including the little technical interludes very good – the atmosphere – in hd with surround sound – great – only thing it was too long but it was a true 500 miler and had to go to bed as early start – but not F1 – and definetly F1 would benefit from the points about cameras / radios etc – getting us involved/commited that is what showmanship is about – ps do you think wee man gets a ride on a camel when trauling for new venue’s – may explain why he takes the hump at times with organisers
18th February 2008, 23:37
I watched a few minutes of the Daytona 500 with my brother and was appaled at the amount of cautions and crashes. I also caught a bit of a truck series race. I couldn’t stop laughing at the trucks apperences.
A side note, it seems to me that NASCAR is immune to the “green racing” disease. They run many more races than F1 for much longer, have more cars, more practices(how much practice does it take to go in a bloody oval?), longer qualifying, and pointless races that don’t even count for points during the week. Why must F1 br plauged with stupid, pointless regulations to try and make the sport “greener”?
19th February 2008, 1:28
I’m not a NASCAR fan but people in the US are truely fanatical about the sport. The qualifying process is complicated to the point of being mystical. Trying to figure it out makes you head hurt and the cars are as simple as they come. They still have carburetors. If a driver wins that the fans don’t like they throw beer and chicken legs at the car, something I’m sure the FIA would launch an immediate investigation over. I do however agree with comments about more cameras and team radio. If you want to make F1 more exciting get rid of some of the inane rules like not allowing team orders.
19th February 2008, 1:32
re: NASCAR and “green”, a hilarious side bar. When the United States Government mandated the switch from leaded to unleaded fuels in the 1980s, NASCAR somehow got an exemption. So, for something like 25 years after the rest of the country was forced to unleaded fuels, NASCARs still using the nasty stuff. Last year NASCAR finally switched to unleaded fuel and put out some press releases about how NASCAR was going to be more environmentally friendly because of the switch, and the major news sources bought it. _NO_ONE_ except for a few bloggers pointed out how hilarious it was to claim to be environmentally friendly when they were 25 years late to the party, and the parties already out of date – Indy’s running 100% ethanol and other series are starting to explore KERS. What a joke.
19th February 2008, 1:47
re: Qualifying. It’s a little bit more fair to say the Daytona 500 qualifying is complicated to the point of being mystical. I consider myself a fan and I honestly don’t fully understand how the reconcile the qualifying laps and the qualifying races.
That said, the normal process is different, but not significantly more complicated, than F1 qualifying.
* 43 cars start
* top 35 cars in owners points automatically entered
* most recent series champion who doesn’t qualify by top 35 or time gets in (“champion’s provisional”)
* remaining 7 (or 8 if no champion’s provisional taken) chosen by fastest time of those not automatically entered (the “go or go home” cars)
* The starting grid is ordered according to qualifying time regardless whether your entry was guaranteed or earned.
* every car starts
* all cars go out on track for 15 minutes to make their best time. bottom 6 qualifiers are removed and will start 17-22 as set by their qualifying time. The times of the other 14 cars are dropped.
* the remaining 16 cars attempt to set their best time. As before the lowest 6 qualifiers are dropped and set in pos. 11-16 according to time. The fastest 10 advance.
* the remaining 10 cars attempt to set fastest time. pos. 1-10 set according to fastest lap in this period.
F1 qualifying is certainly more entertaining than NASCAR’s (heck, more entertaining than F1’s races, sometimes), but at least as complicated if not more. I really wish they’d do away with the top 35 rule in NASCAR qualifying, but at least there’s still the thrill of some people not qualifying.
19th February 2008, 2:11
Hi, John — thank God you figured it out, grin … I’ve been watching NASCAR qualifying for years, and I still haven’t figured out the Daytona rules, as they’re far different from the rest of the year.
(The Duels, for example — part of our favorite part of Speedweeks, and two separate qualifying races — pointless, as another has mentioned here, in terms of championship points, yes. But, not pointless in Daytona at all, since that’s how some have even a prayer of getting in on speed/skill. In fact, I think many NASCAR fans would like to see this prior to most races, as the top 35 and other qualifying nonsense doesn’t allow for the fastest/”best” to run every week. It’s just cost-prohibitive for a series that runs 36 races a year — and, aside from that, these teams would not have personal lives if they spent that much time actually racing every week.)
As far as F1 — I’ll probably never understand some things, but that’ll never stop me from watching and/or loving it!
Though, I have to agree, and think I’ve probably posted about it more than a couple of times — qualifying is sometimes MUCH more exciting than the actual racing in F1. It simply seems so much more passionate and all-out than some of the races, with so much more strategy and drama, etc.
But, again … I think, for both series, it takes watching enough of it to appreciate the differences — not to mention, to even attempt to “get it”, lol!!
19th February 2008, 4:10
Better late than never, right?
As for Enthanol: “We have seen that the environmental problems caused by biofuels and also the social problems are bigger than we thought they were. So we have to move very carefully,” EU Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas told the BBC.
“We have to have criteria for sustainability, including social and environmental issues, because there are some benefits from biofuels.”
Guess seeing some biofuels barely cut emissions at all, having others lead to rainforest destruction, driving up food prices and prompting rich firms to drive poor people off their land to convert it to fuel crops is OK with you. And apparently with the IRL also.
Sorry, not for me, it’s nothing more than a publicity stunt and will do nothing for the environment.
19th February 2008, 4:39
Hmmmm, wow so many people with different ideas, Mr Eccelstone are you listening? Or just seeing how many $100 dollar bills you have under your bed? If only the F1 powers that be actually listened to the racing fans? At least maybe a short list could be taken on for F1 tv changes, maybe Ron and Jean need a bit more inticing ($$$) to open the radio airwaves. instead of changing technical rules every 10 months if the tv “Spectacle” was a bit more inticing for the viewers i’m sure it would encourage more people to watch and in turn more revenue for the teams hopefully putting off the need for “Cost cutting” technical changes, ie 4 race gearboxes engines etc. If F1 is the pinnacle of technology on track then why not off. HD broadcasting indeed and more access to the teams and drivers- why so shy? Well done NASCAR for taking the veiwers into the cockpit
19th February 2008, 6:42
“Why must F1 be plauged with stupid, pointless regulations to try and make the sport “greener”?” His name is “Mad Max”, enough said.
Relative to “Boogity” man Darrel Waltrip his moniker while he raced was “Jaws”, as he never met a microphone he disliked. He has many intelligent things to offer when in an interview setting such as “Wind Tunnel” with Dave DeSpain on Speedtv. His on air personna is all marketing.
As for NASCAR’s popularity here in the US, my personal feeling is that it probably has peaked and will stay more or less where it currently sits.
With the pending implosion of the Champ Car series my fondest wish is that open wheel racing can regain a hint of it’s former greatness. Which will lead to better F1 coverage as well.
19th February 2008, 8:13
talk about the history?
ur kidding rnt u?
with new venues drivers can only talk of a race up to 2 yrs ago!
19th February 2008, 9:48
I agree with some of the original sentiments raised above i.e. particularly the access, radios and cameras issue. Access for me is a huge issue. F1 is paranoid and stingy about its access. I generally love most motorised racing and happened to watch the Nascar for the first time also. I did find it a little long winded at times. I did not care much for the commentators. Some of the graphics were great but sometimes i just wished the screen would be cleared of all graphics so we could just sit back and enjoy the racing. There was just to much rubbish scrolling all over the screen.
I watch F1 on ITV (in the UK) and as much as i enjoy what ITV generally do, i think they can do much much much more. I wish ITV would use split screens so we can always keep one eye on the racing, and at the same time watch the pit reporters for example interview a driver who may have crashed out… yes we can multi-task too you know, lol. I also find it baffling that right now ITV does not even give us any ongoing weekly testing updates from the track. I am certain this is a wasted opportunity.
Lastly, during the season ITV has traditionally shown a highlights package of GP2 a week later. I’m amazed they have not even bothered with the GP2 Asia series?! I watch it on sky anyway but it’s a real shame because it sends a message that ITV really don’t care much for their viewers.
19th February 2008, 11:19
NASCAR definitely has some items that F1 should adopt. i mean f1 drivers are pretty much gods to the racing fans and i think its important that the fans get an interaction with their idols other than the pre scripted and frankly terribly boring pre/post race interviews. how about an autograph session, or simply even press conferences where fans can ask their own questions? i really think that to improve popularity Eccelstone should do more than just trying to expand its fan base and as well improve the already existing fan base.
I especially like the idea of team radios. i think its terribly exciting when you get a drivers opinion on whats going on and the idea of finding out exactly whats going wrong can be quite comical. I seem to remember times where drivers would just complain and the pit crew would just tell them to get on with it etc.
Overall i think F1 has a lot to learn from american sports, but that being said, there are somethings they should just ignore, just as was said in the article!
19th February 2008, 11:36
I agree with what you said keith but on the radio side, i’m kind of new to nascar but i think that nascar if first and foremost a strategic series.
I listened to radio comms on some onboard videos and the radio guy is always required to tell the pilot who is around him, if the line is “clear” etc..
In F1 i think we would need a better selection of team radio because radio comms seem more scarce.
However that would be great, i recall last year at one race a radio comm to hamilton telling him the pace needed to exit the pitlane ahead of his rival.
That would be really interesting.
On the cameras i just don’t understand why we can’t get premiere live everywhere! damn onboard cameras are so cool!
Also more telemetry is needed, last year the G-forces telemetry was shown on only two cars (heidfeld and trulli i think) and for not even one full lap.
19th February 2008, 13:38
It seems no one likes F1 TV coverage. I wonder if that is just fundamentally flawed by the nature of the single director/video feed for the world? This is an open ended question, but perhaps there are differences in the type of broadcasts that different countries and cultures want that require this no-frills, lowest-common-denominator video coverage that we get? It seems that the Brits here generally think the NASCAR broadcast is better, but perhaps flashier than they would want. All things considered, America and GB culture are not terribly far removed from each other when considered against the backdrop of world history. Perhaps Asian, African, South American, even continental European cultures are far enough removed that, although spicing up the broadcast would appeal to some cultures, it would have a more negative impact on total viewer appeal across the entire viewer base?
That said, I’m probably giving the FOM far too much credit, but it’s an interesting anthropological question. Regardless of whether the FOM is lazy or calculated, I think it’s safe to say no one will ever be totally happy, and the only way to get better is if FOM sells video feeds to all cameras at the race and allow local broadcasters to produce it however they want.
19th February 2008, 13:42
@marc – I never said I was a fan of Ethanol, I was merely holding it up as a mirror to NASCAR’s absurdity in the area of fuel and eco-friendliness. I think Ethanol is a marketing sham also. That said, I live in the middle of a state full of corn fields, ethanol refineries, and toyota and honda plants. So who am I to judge?
19th February 2008, 14:33
Marc – “Unless you chose to qualify that statement (i.e. note only 2 of 36 events are held on road courses) I would suggest even you wouldn’t much care to be part of a safety crew or a driver of a disabled car would be in favor of 180mph cars conducting a “race” in three corners and have to slow for an “area caution” for one single corner. And that corner being in many cases less than a mile and 10-25 seconds away.”
I guess I should expand on that statement a bit more. I don’t mean to imply that we should have cars going 180mph past workers on track. I’ve worked as a course worker before, and understand the dangers involved there.
That said… I’ve worked as a course worker before… and I’ve seen 8 lap cautions for a plastic bag on the track. Ok, 1 lap to slow the cars down… get the bag… and you should be green by lap 3 at the latest.
Or for that matter…. it’s a plastic bag! Throw the debris flag, and be done with it.
19th February 2008, 16:52
As an American F1 fan I watched the coverage for Daytona. First off Daytona is said to be NASCAR’s greatest race of the year. It is also the first of the year. So the coverage was like it is for the American Football’s Super Bowl. The commentators even said that this is the super bowl of racing. This is why the coverage was this big. No other race is covered this big. But even when NASCAR covers a race in the middle of the season the coverage is more comfortable then ITV’s. The coverage is for the viewer they try to make you part of the show. ITV just shows the race. This difference is the way that NASCAR is percieved vs F1. NASCAR is the sport for the common man. F1 is elitist. I always felt the sparten ITV coverage was because of this elitist attitude of the sport. And the sport is elitist. The drivers are treated like rock stars. The owners like Gods and if you do not have an appointment you can not get within 500 feet of them or the pits. NASCAR is exactly the opposite. Like I said in a post on another blog. As an American I take what I can get from F1 because to me it is the best racing. I also can not see in the forseable future that we will hear any radio chatter in F1. To the powers that be we can not handle it. I feel that F1 looks down on the true fan. This sport is not for us it is for the corperations according to who runs it today. This is evident in the lack of marketing just go to the NASCAR website and travel to a team website. Look at all the gear they want to sell you. Now go to the McLaren website they will sell you last years FA hat for $20.00 I think they have a total of 10 items for sale. One NASCAR team will sell you every thing from a toothbrush to a beachtowel with your drivers logo as well as the NASCAR logo. F1 missed the marketing seminar!!! I feel that they need to get it together as this world market becomes saturated with racing deciplines.
19th February 2008, 22:24
Seb Carter – for the last 3 years ALL the teams have done autograph sessions at the Melbourne GP. Also, if you are lucky – and persistant – you can catch the drivers as they leave the track.
But as far as I am aware, Melbourne is the only GP where the drivers are accessible like this.
20th February 2008, 5:54
OK,Ok,ok……here’s a knuckleball.
Open wheel racing unifies in the US (todays news), they regain their lost American audience, plus the abandoned US/F1 fan, and use the NASCAR model to reach their audience….5 years out…they are as big as they ever were pre-split. Then…..10 years out…..they use that successful financial/fan/racing model to move off shore….filling a need for excellent open wheel racing in locations which F1 has abandoned, or doesn’t see as financially viable.
And if you think that is scary, or ludicrous……….throw in building truly dynamic, fan friendly, racing venues that capture…the imagination of the fan, along with cars that can do more than turn left…..and 25 years out you have….the end to the dominance of Formula One.
2nd October 2008, 13:11
Whats exactly wrong with Darrel Waltrip’s “Boogity, boogity, boogity, Let’s go Racing Boys”?
Comments are closed.