rec.autos.simulators

Nicely put Mike

I have been reading this thread with interest and most of what I want to say
has been said by someone else, but I have one word for this thread:

IROC

  How come the events are nearly always won by a NASCAR driver?  The series
is run on ovals exclusively, but somehow the 'capable' road racers competing
in identically prepared cars can't beat the oval guys.  Is it possible that
oval racing is not easier, but simply requires a *different* skill set?  It
is likely the road racers would cream the NASCAR guys on a road course, but
if driving an oval is so easy..how come the road racers can't beat them
there?

~daxe

"A million dollars, baby. What the hell did you expect me to do?"

Definately not for wusses, I agree.

Jan.
----

I agree.

Although, Burton was on the inside of him, so he didn't knock him into the
wall.  Now that's what makes it exciting.  A last lap mad dash to the finish.
I know the drivers hate restrictor plate tracks, but having been to Talladega
it's the best racing I've ever seen.
Racer X
Veteran Sim Racer
Victory Lane-
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Speedway/1423/

But even if I train in his ferrari for 1 year (oh yes) I will never beat him
there, because he is just better..

--
don

[|]-(_)-[|]

--
don

[|]-(_)-[|]

Isn't it a bit the same to watch a nascar race on an oval track somewhere
and the next oval race 15 days later somewhere else.

Please don't tell me too much about "each oval is different because the
banking is different or because the tarmac doesn't have the same texture"

oh, boy.

ok, i'm not calling you a name here, but.... this shows an incredible
unfamilarity with the subject at hand, and (IMO) virtually disqualifies you
from having an "informed opinion". When you have time, just look at the
track layouts (pictures) of Indianapolis, Michigan, Nazareth, Darlington,
Bristol, Pocono, C***te, Phoenix, and Daytona. Or- since this is
rec.autos.simulators- try a lap at each in a sim. They couldn't be more
different!! The primary differences among ovals are:
1) track length -probably the most obvious one (which you completely ignore
in your post). Oval racetracks range from 0.5mile (or even a bit less) up to
2.66 miles around. This makes a huge difference in both how the tracks
themselves are driven and how one must approach the race itself in terms of
pit strategy and racing style (physical bumping & grinding on short tracks
to close aerodynamic drafting on large ones, etc.), two different things in
oval racing which are too often the same in road racing- (not to disparage
road racing as I love F1, CART, etc.).

2) track layout- the arrangement of the turns within the distance.
Indianapolis, Daytona and Pocono are all2.5 miles around, but they could
hardly be more different. Sadly, there are too many "cookie-cutter" tracks
that all look like C***te out there these days, but road racing is hardly
immune to *that* malady- if i hear that one more great old circuit has been
emasculated by another chicane, i'll choke- but rest assured that ovals have
character.

3) banking/tarmac... ok, i'm not supposed to mention these. they're not that
important on TV anyway (well, large differences in banking ARE- notice the
difference between a Martinsville and a Bristol, for example, but that goes
more to track layout)- so i see your point about why we're not supposed to
mention it. It is hard to tell the difference between Texas and C***te, I
agree. But bear in mind that- to the driver and engineer- a few bumps here
and there or a few degrees of banking make a great deal of difference in
both setup and driving style/line. Point being that there are challenges in
oval racing that you have clearly not considered....

just as a summary, you can see descriptions of most of the NASCAR-sanctioned
tracks at http://www.racesimcentral.net/
clicking on the links should give you a picture.... the differences are
blantently obvious.

As a driver, you may be surprised at the skill required to be consistently
fast on an oval. I've only done a little karting, but i've always heard this
(which seems to agree with personal observation): it's easy to run
respectably fast on an oval with good equipment and some driving skill. But
it really does take a special ability to run *really* fast. Plenty of
throttle control, feel, etc. The ability to conserve tires and fuel. Running
quickly with a car whose setup is not quite right. Understanding the changes
to a racetrack with weather and *** buildup (oval tracks are *extremely*
sensitive to such environmental conditions, making each race different from
a driving and setup perspective). There's alot of skill involved in setting
up a car, and providing feedback to one's mechanics. Just don't discount the
driving skill required, despite the fact that it may be different from that
required for road racing.

As to the rest of your post, I couldn't respond to all of it in a short
space....except to say that, to a large extent, oval racing is a different
animal, with different rules of conduct. If you can take it for what it is,
you may enjoy it. It isn't for everyone. But before making sweeping
statements or passing judgement- or even forming an opinion- you might want
to learn something about it. If you keep an open mind, you may like it.

I think if there were more racers from different genres willing to
participate in IROC it might have a different flavor.  I understand that the
champions from most racing series are invited to participate, but many
refuse.  It would be a lot of fun to see M. Schumacher running against D.
Earnhardt, don't you think?

~daxe

But wait...ovals are nothing but straights and left hand corners, right?
Doesn't Michael Schumacher take left turns and go down straight roads in F1?
If the answer is yes, then it would seem he already has lots of practice
running in a situation that is limited to those two things and he should
excel automatically.

While I doubt you would get any argument that MS is a better driver than,
say, Dale Earnhardt (including from DE himself),  it is quite possible he
might not have the right combination of skills that would make him good at
NASCAR.  Try it for yourself.  Get your favorite F1 sim and run a full
length race.  It's exhausting mentally and physically.  Then, put on your a
NASCAR sim and run a full-length race at Talledega.  You will be mentally
and physically exhausted after that race too, but for different reasons.
The frantic pace of driving on an F1 circuit at speed and negotiating all
those corners requires a very different type of concentration and intensity
than flawlessly completing repeated fast laps on a NASCAR oval.

There have been a few successful road racers who entered NASCAR and none of
them has fared very well.  I just don't think it is fair or accurate to
characterize the demands of NASCAR racing as some kind of inferior subset of
the skills necessary to compete in road racing.

~daxe

Jan.
----

NASCAR tries (the operative word here being 'tries') to keep a 'level'
playing field where all the cars are supposed to be 'equal'. It then
comes down to driver skill against other drivers and other teams as pit
crews play a primary role in a teams success, look at Gordon and the
Rainbow Warriors who all defected to DJ's team. So the drivers are
basically in a contest against one another, down to the checkers.

So what you have in effect is door to door, sometimes physical driving
and physical sports are something Americans love. Oval racing requires
steely nerves, concentration to keep your line and save your tires and
awareness of other drivers and boldness to make moves. Euro style racing
requires steely nerves, concentration to run your line around the track
and save tires, remember braking points at all turns etc and if you can
keep that up you will get an opportunity to pass.

What it boils down to in essence is:
NASCAR is mano e mano (man vs. man)
Euro style is mano e clocko... :) (man vs the clock)

Just my .025 cents...