NASCAR Should Be Shut Down

I find it really ridiculous that people are acting as if the death of a NASCAR driver is a tragedy. You knew it was going to happen, and so did I. It happens almost every year. Three times last year alone. When you support an activity that you know will result in the death of someone, then it's not a tragedy. It's simply disgusting. I keep hearing the phrase, "Death is a part of auto racing, and these drivers understand that but want to do it anyway." Bullshit. It isn't a part of all types of auto racing. Just NASCAR. Formula 1 hasn't had a driver die since 1994. Before that it was 1982. NASCAR is about beer and crashes. Safety is a science in F1, and their record proves it. They have the top experts in the world in charge of the safety of it's drivers. NASCAR is a joke and the modern equivalent of the galdiator races. If you support NASCAR, then you support the INEVITABLE death of it's drivers. How the hell are you then sad when one dies? Turns my stomach when I read or see the melodramatic tributes to a fan favorite. I LOVE F1, but if the drivers were dying I'd say close it down right now. I have said on this newsgroup before that I didn't think the F1 drivers of the '60's as modeled in GPL were brave, heroic or "real" drivers because they raced knowing death was a real possibility. I think they were simply foolish people who didn't value their lives very much. There is NO reason why drivers have to die in NASCAR. It's simply a POORLY run, bush league type of auto racing with fans that apparently don't TRULY care about the safety of it's drivers. It's an embarrassment. Drivers still have the choice of wearing open-faced helmets? Drivers have the choice to wear a neck brace that obviously could have saved the lives of previous dead drivers? If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excuse for NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. Shut it down or just count the races until the next dead driver is pulled from his car. Then the people who are in charge of NASCAR, and it's fans can once again pay tribute to them. Pathetic. David G Fisher

BTW, I haven't posted any opinions about this in any other thread. I'm not out to ruin anyone's tributes to Earnhardt, but I simply find this whole situation ridiculous and wanted to say so. David G Fisher "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:DPHk6.464$[email hidden]... > I find it really ridiculous that people are acting as if the death of a > NASCAR driver is a tragedy. > > You knew it was going to happen, and so did I. It happens almost everyyear. > Three times last year alone. When you support an activity that you knowwill > result in the death of someone, then it's not a tragedy. It's simply > disgusting. > > I keep hearing the phrase, "Death is a part of auto racing, and these > drivers understand that but want to do it anyway." Bullshit. It isn't apart > of all types of auto racing. Just NASCAR. Formula 1 hasn't had a driverdie

Quoted text (7 lines)

> since 1994. Before that it was 1982. NASCAR is about beer and crashes. > Safety is a science in F1, and their record proves it. They have the top > experts in the world in charge of the safety of it's drivers. NASCAR is a > joke and the modern equivalent of the galdiator races. > > If you support NASCAR, then you support the INEVITABLE death of it's > drivers. How the hell are you then sad when one dies? Turns my stomach

when > I read or see the melodramatic tributes to a fan favorite. I LOVE F1, butif > the drivers were dying I'd say close it down right now. I have said onthis > newsgroup before that I didn't think the F1 drivers of the '60's asmodeled > in GPL were brave, heroic or "real" drivers because they raced knowingdeath > was a real possibility. I think they were simply foolish people who didn't > value their lives very much. > > There is NO reason why drivers have to die in NASCAR. It's simply a POORLY > run, bush league type of auto racing with fans that apparently don't TRULY > care about the safety of it's drivers. It's an embarrassment. Driversstill > have the choice of wearing open-faced helmets? Drivers have the choice to > wear a neck brace that obviously could have saved the lives of previousdead > drivers? > > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excusefor > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > Shut it down or just count the races until the next dead driver is pulled > from his car. Then the people who are in charge of NASCAR, and it's fanscan

Quoted text (11 lines)

> once again pay tribute to them. > > Pathetic. > > David G Fisher > > > > > >

For a differing view, try http://www.speedvision.com/pub/articles/racing/08inews/010219a.html Cheers, Steve B. "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote... > I find it really ridiculous<snip>

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > some funny stuff That's about the most BS I've read in awhile. A couple of things, you can't compare F1 and Nascar. Two totally different types of racing. Race marshal Paolo Ghislimberti was killed by flying debris after a collision in the Italian Grand Prix at Monza last year. And your comment about 60's drivers being foolish is just unbelievable. Nascar is not about beer and crashes. It's about tight racing and going the full distance. F1 is starting to look like a parade lap and the only passing done in the pits. I like all forms of racing, F1, Nascar, Cart, even IRL. I think you should of put a little more thought in your post. Anthony Brooks

>"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excusefor > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. Uh LOL sure David everybody is entitled to his opinion, whatever rationale it is.. ;) Did you scream that babbling in 1994 when Senna and Ratzenberger both died the same weekend, when Wendlinger got a severe crash at Monaco, when Barrichello had a death-defying crash from the lack of safety in Imola's track configuration, etc..? Racing is dangerous. People have, are and will continue to be killed or severely injured. Deal with it, or stop watching it. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- People think it must be fun to be a genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

Poorly written melodrama. I guess heroin addicts are brave too, because they certainly put their lives at high risk in order to enjoy their hobby. How about drunken bicyclists? http://home-news.excite.com/news/r/010220/16/science-health-bikes-dc David G Fisher "Steve Blankenship" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> For a differing view, try > > http://www.speedvision.com/pub/articles/racing/08inews/010219a.html > > Cheers, > > Steve B. > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote... > > I find it really ridiculous<snip> > >

Poorly written melodrama. I guess *** ***s are brave too, because they certainly put their lives at high risk in order to enjoy their hobby. How about drunken bicyclists? http://home-news.excite.com/news/r/010220/16/science-health-bikes-dc David G Fisher

Quoted text (11 lines)

> For a differing view, try > http://www.speedvision.com/pub/articles/racing/08inews/010219a.html > Cheers, > Steve B. > > I find it really ridiculous<snip>

No dead drivers in F1 since 1994. 1982 before that. Four dead in NASCAR in the past season + one race this year. NASCAR is a badly run auto racing series. F1 is light years ahead of it. David G Fisher "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:suIk6.14267$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (29 lines)

> >"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excuse > for > > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > > Uh LOL sure David everybody is entitled to his opinion, whatever rationale > it is.. ;) > > Did you scream that babbling in 1994 when Senna and Ratzenberger both died > the same weekend, when Wendlinger got a severe crash at Monaco, when > Barrichello had a death-defying crash from the lack of safety in Imola's > track configuration, etc..? > > Racing is dangerous. People have, are and will continue to be killed or > severely injured. Deal with it, or stop watching it. > > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- May the Downforce be with you... > -- http://www.ymenard.com/ > -- People think it must be fun to be a genius, but they don't realise how > hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world. > > >

Yes F1 is light years ahead...how many on-track lead changes in the years since the Senna accident? For that matter, how many people die each year having Sex...shall we ban that as unsafe? Studies have shown most auto accidents occur on the roads..thats why I drive through people's yards...studies have shown a much lower incident rate in yards than on roads... F1 and Nascar both have roots going back to racing on public roads, which series abandoned the public highways first? The nature of F1 tracks and Nascar tracks dictate different approaches to safety...it appears the solid tank winston cup car model may need some rethinking. I applaud anyone who advocates safety improvements, but I disapprove of those who use tragic incidents to further a cause. one further note...with the 4 deaths this past year...has anyone filed wrongful death suits yet??(I'm curious, I don't know) dave henrie "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:vCIk6.847$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> No dead drivers in F1 since 1994. 1982 before that. > > Four dead in NASCAR in the past season + one race this year. > > NASCAR is a badly run auto racing series. F1 is light years ahead of it. > > David G Fisher > > > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:suIk6.14267$[email hidden]... > > >"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > > > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO

excuse > > for > > > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > > > > > Uh LOL sure David everybody is entitled to his opinion, whateverrationale > > it is.. ;) > > > > Did you scream that babbling in 1994 when Senna and Ratzenberger bothdied

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > the same weekend, when Wendlinger got a severe crash at Monaco, when > > Barrichello had a death-defying crash from the lack of safety in Imola's > > track configuration, etc..? > > > > Racing is dangerous. People have, are and will continue to be killed or > > severely injured. Deal with it, or stop watching it. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > > -- May the Downforce be with you... > > -- http://www.ymenard.com/ > > -- People think it must be fun to be a genius, but they don't realise

how > > hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world. > > > > > > >

Don't watch or participate in things you find to be upsetting or that otherwise go against your ethical grain. Don't force your opinions on others that aren't receptive. Much of your reasoning is flawed - you draw conclusions that are not backed up by your stated opinions masquerading as facts. The bottom line is that, as in everything, humans are individuals and by definition make their own choices. To put it crassly, who the hell do you think you are? If Dale wanted to run with an open faced helmet, then by all means, let him. It was his life to lose, not yours. Since your such a big F1 fan and safety expert, then please why don't you call up Bernie and tell him how he could've prevented that corner workers death last season? Get a grip. -- Philip D'Amato [email hidden] 00 ZX-6R 00 S4 "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:DPHk6.464$[email hidden]... <snip>

Fine. I'll retract my call for it to be shut down. From now on I'll just continue to call it a crap form of auto racing that has far more in common with the WWF than anything else. 49 year old drivers? Artificial close racing? Dead bodies? Beer, beer, and more beer. David G Fisher "Philip D'Amato" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:CWIk6.2175$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Don't watch or participate in things you find to be upsetting or that > otherwise go against your ethical grain. Don't force your opinions on > others that aren't receptive. Much of your reasoning is flawed - you draw > conclusions that are not backed up by your stated opinions masquerading as > facts. The bottom line is that, as in everything, humans are individuals > and by definition make their own choices. To put it crassly, who the hell > do you think you are? If Dale wanted to run with an open faced helmet,

then > by all means, let him. It was his life to lose, not yours. Since yoursuch > a big F1 fan and safety expert, then please why don't you call up Bernieand

Quoted text (16 lines)

> tell him how he could've prevented that corner workers death last season? > Get a grip. > > -- > Philip D'Amato > [email hidden] > 00 ZX-6R > 00 S4 > > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:DPHk6.464$[email hidden]... > > <snip> > >

"Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:1PIk6.452319$[email hidden]... >For that matter, how many people die each year > having Sex...shall we ban that as unsafe? If thousands of people get together to start watching people die while in the middle of having sex, then yes, I'd probably be strongly in favor of an event like that being shut down. David G Fisher

I never actually said I wanted it banned. I did say I think it should be shut down. If it can be fixed by the morons in charge (doubtful), then start it up again. And yes, I'm a race fan too. But I'm a race fan of racing which is done by people who tend to evolve over time, and who think that doing something (anything at all) at it's absolute highest level is something to strive for at all times. David G Fisher "rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 06:15:52 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]>wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > > > >"Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > >news:1PIk6.452319$[email hidden]... > >>For that matter, how many people die each year > >> having Sex...shall we ban that as unsafe? > > > >If thousands of people get together to start watching people die while in > >the middle of having sex, then yes, I'd probably be strongly in favor of

an

Quoted text (14 lines)

> >event like that being shut down. > > David, why are you fixated on fans only going to the races to > watch someone die? What evidence do you have of that assertion? > I didn't hear of -anyone- that was happy with what they saw > occur on Feb. 18th at Daytona. > > While I agree with you that Nascar needs to get it's ass in gear > in a big hurry and improve driver safety, I think that pre-emptively > banning the series is a little over the top. > > But then again, I'm a race fan. > >

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:vCIk6.847$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> No dead drivers in F1 since 1994. 1982 before that. > > Four dead in NASCAR in the past season + one race this year. > > NASCAR is a badly run auto racing series. F1 is light years ahead of it. > > David G Fisher > >

sure, david. but just set the clock back a few years.... i dunno, say 1994. that year, there were 0 winston cup series deaths, and 2 F1 deaths in *one weekend*. looking at that data set, you'd have to be crying for the shuttering of F1. F1 has been lucky lately. nascar quite unlucky (at least), and may indeed have reached a point at which changes need to be made. but you have to remember all the diffferences in the series. just the number of races, laps, and drivers alone makes direct comparisons impossible. (i wonder how many F1 seasons worth of driver-miles are contained in the first 1/3rd of the nascar schedule?) auto racing is inherently dangerous. surely, it should be no more dangerous than it has to be, but you have to recall NASCAR's excellent safety record up until the past 2 years. were they lucky? yes, probably. should they be making changes and moving faster? almost surely it's easy to say that now. but "badly run bush league" is pretty harsh. F1 has been quite lucky as of late, but you shouldn't delude yourself that it's much more than that. do they have some excellent safety devices and track modifications? yes, in part due to senna's death, they do now. but they are hardly immune from the dangers of the sport. some would argue that driving without a roof over one's head is simply asking for trouble a la greg moore, making F1 even less rational than a stock-type series. whatever. the point is that these kinds of risks are inherent to all forms of the sport, and your beloved F1 is anything but insulated from these risks. almost any F1 crash carries the possibility of a driver's head making direct contact, for example. we can only hope that DE's death has a similar effect on nascar's safety efforts that senna's seemed to inspire in his series. but with your attitiude i'd say you're probably better off giving up motorsports altogether... you're bound to be disgusted again, unfortunately.

yes, you've nailed it. that's it. i hope you're the one to tell the folks over in rasf1 that they can no longer drink beer.... (here's a hint- sometimes, people who enjoy F1 also enjoy beer, too. no, really!) what on earth does what you've written have to do with anything? thankfully, no one will be taking your call for anything to be shut down seriously.... your logical flaws and sheer, obvious bias drown out any possible point you might try to make. "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:RYIk6.1130$[email hidden]... > Fine. I'll retract my call for it to be shut down. > > From now on I'll just continue to call it a crap form of auto racing that > has far more in common with the WWF than anything else. > > 49 year old drivers? Artificial close racing? Dead bodies? Beer, beer,and

Quoted text (10 lines)

> more beer. > > David G Fisher > > > "Philip D'Amato" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:CWIk6.2175$[email hidden]... > > Don't watch or participate in things you find to be upsetting or that > > otherwise go against your ethical grain. Don't force your opinions on > > others that aren't receptive. Much of your reasoning is flawed - you

draw > > conclusions that are not backed up by your stated opinions masqueradingas > > facts. The bottom line is that, as in everything, humans areindividuals > > and by definition make their own choices. To put it crassly, who thehell

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > do you think you are? If Dale wanted to run with an open faced helmet, > then > > by all means, let him. It was his life to lose, not yours. Since your > such > > a big F1 fan and safety expert, then please why don't you call up Bernie > and > > tell him how he could've prevented that corner workers death last

season?

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > Get a grip. > > > > -- > > Philip D'Amato > > [email hidden] > > 00 ZX-6R > > 00 S4 > > > > > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:DPHk6.464$[email hidden]... > > > > <snip> > > > > >

Touch�. Formula 1 : 18 year old drivers (how high is their car insurance?), cars with traction control running single file, dead bodies, and wine, cheese, and champagne. Actually, I follow F1 too. There's something about those Ferraris. Come to think of it, my company is sponsoring Sauber now, maybe I'll head out to Indy this year... -- Philip D'Amato [email hidden] 00 ZX-6R 00 S4 "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:RYIk6.1130$[email hidden]... > Fine. I'll retract my call for it to be shut down. > > From now on I'll just continue to call it a crap form of auto racing that > has far more in common with the WWF than anything else. > > 49 year old drivers? Artificial close racing? Dead bodies? Beer, beer, and > more beer. > > David G Fisher > > > "Philip D'Amato" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:CWIk6.2175$[email hidden]... > > Don't watch or participate in things you find to be upsetting or that > > otherwise go against your ethical grain. Don't force your opinions on > > others that aren't receptive. Much of your reasoning is flawed - you draw > > conclusions that are not backed up by your stated opinions masquerading as > > facts. The bottom line is that, as in everything, humans are individuals > > and by definition make their own choices. To put it crassly, who the hell > > do you think you are? If Dale wanted to run with an open faced helmet, > then > > by all means, let him. It was his life to lose, not yours. Since your > such > > a big F1 fan and safety expert, then please why don't you call up Bernie > and > > tell him how he could've prevented that corner workers death last season? > > Get a grip. > > > > -- > > Philip D'Amato > > [email hidden] > > 00 ZX-6R > > 00 S4 > > > > > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:DPHk6.464$[email hidden]... > > > > <snip> > > > > >

In defense of the original poster's comments. F1 tracks do have a larger margin of safety built into them than Nascar tracks - Tire walls, gravel run off, etc. Nascar tracks seem to resemble some kind of gladiator pit with those concrete walls of death. You would have to agreee that having grass on the infield leading to an inner concrete wall is unnecessary? All the drivers knew there would be plenty of carnage going into Daytona as well with there special rules. It would also make some sense if Nascar requited those HANS neck devices because of the higher chances of incidents. You know they used to play footbal with leather helmets too. Perhasp it's time for a change. Anthony Brooks <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > some funny stuff > > That's about the most BS I've read in awhile. A couple of things, youcan't > compare F1 and Nascar. Two totally different types of racing. Race marshal > Paolo Ghislimberti was killed by flying debris after a collision in the > Italian Grand Prix at Monza last year. And your comment about 60's drivers > being foolish is just unbelievable. Nascar is not about beer and crashes. > It's about tight racing and going the full distance. F1 is starting tolook > like a parade lap and the only passing done in the pits. I like all formsof > racing, F1, Nascar, Cart, even IRL. I think you should of put a littlemore > thought in your post. > Anthony Brooks > >

>Beer, beer, andmore beer. David G Fisher I thought this ng was about auto racing. Can his religious preference be too far behind? #8 -Billy "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:RYIk6.1130$[email hidden]... > Fine. I'll retract my call for it to be shut down. > > From now on I'll just continue to call it a crap form of auto racing that > has far more in common with the WWF than anything else. > > 49 year old drivers? Artificial close racing? Dead bodies? Beer, beer,and

Quoted text (10 lines)

> more beer. > > David G Fisher > > > "Philip D'Amato" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:CWIk6.2175$[email hidden]... > > Don't watch or participate in things you find to be upsetting or that > > otherwise go against your ethical grain. Don't force your opinions on > > others that aren't receptive. Much of your reasoning is flawed - you

draw > > conclusions that are not backed up by your stated opinions masqueradingas > > facts. The bottom line is that, as in everything, humans areindividuals > > and by definition make their own choices. To put it crassly, who thehell

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > do you think you are? If Dale wanted to run with an open faced helmet, > then > > by all means, let him. It was his life to lose, not yours. Since your > such > > a big F1 fan and safety expert, then please why don't you call up Bernie > and > > tell him how he could've prevented that corner workers death last

season?

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > Get a grip. > > > > -- > > Philip D'Amato > > [email hidden] > > 00 ZX-6R > > 00 S4 > > > > > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:DPHk6.464$[email hidden]... > > > > <snip> > > > > >

nascar is to the american public what the circus used to be for the romans.... The organizers/rulers of nascar get the money, as much money or more than the leading drivers, without taking a risk. But you can't say ANYTHING negative about the US here because it is just not accpeted, it i part of american TRADITION (ha ha ha). I am sure that if America had a sort of F1 championship at the time the roll cage was invented they would have refused it for ten years arguing that "it's for weenies" and "we are real men" and other bullshit. Out of curiosity watch the TV ratings (and thus the money) on nascar's NEXT race, everybody will watch, waiting for blood... Pathetic american media, and the sad thing is that the general public gets to be like that too, but it's not their fault they have nothing else to watch... "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> a �crit dans le message news: DPHk6.464$[email hidden]... > I find it really ridiculous that people are acting as if the death of a > NASCAR driver is a tragedy. > > You knew it was going to happen, and so did I. It happens almost everyyear. > Three times last year alone. When you support an activity that you knowwill > result in the death of someone, then it's not a tragedy. It's simply > disgusting. > > I keep hearing the phrase, "Death is a part of auto racing, and these > drivers understand that but want to do it anyway." Bullshit. It isn't apart > of all types of auto racing. Just NASCAR. Formula 1 hasn't had a driverdie

Quoted text (7 lines)

> since 1994. Before that it was 1982. NASCAR is about beer and crashes. > Safety is a science in F1, and their record proves it. They have the top > experts in the world in charge of the safety of it's drivers. NASCAR is a > joke and the modern equivalent of the galdiator races. > > If you support NASCAR, then you support the INEVITABLE death of it's > drivers. How the hell are you then sad when one dies? Turns my stomach

when > I read or see the melodramatic tributes to a fan favorite. I LOVE F1, butif > the drivers were dying I'd say close it down right now. I have said onthis > newsgroup before that I didn't think the F1 drivers of the '60's asmodeled > in GPL were brave, heroic or "real" drivers because they raced knowingdeath > was a real possibility. I think they were simply foolish people who didn't > value their lives very much. > > There is NO reason why drivers have to die in NASCAR. It's simply a POORLY > run, bush league type of auto racing with fans that apparently don't TRULY > care about the safety of it's drivers. It's an embarrassment. Driversstill > have the choice of wearing open-faced helmets? Drivers have the choice to > wear a neck brace that obviously could have saved the lives of previousdead > drivers? > > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excusefor > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > Shut it down or just count the races until the next dead driver is pulled > from his car. Then the people who are in charge of NASCAR, and it's fanscan

Quoted text (11 lines)

> once again pay tribute to them. > > Pathetic. > > David G Fisher > > > > > >

David, I find it unbelieveable that a fan of auto racing would have an opinion like this. I am a fan of all motorsports and unfortunately they are all dangerous. Death is a possibilty in ALL motorsports. To think differently is to be very, very naive. Yes, Nascar does need to look at safety issues, and they need to do it quickly, but to make claims that Formula 1 is the safest, and that they put safety first is ridiculous. No form of auto racing is 100% safe and never will be. Every day you drive your car, you are risking your own life to some extent. Hundreds(maybe thousands) of deaths happen everyday on the highways of the world due to stupidity, lack of safety features, poorly designed roads and traffic signals, or just too much speed. Cars in general are very dangerous, yet we don't shut down the highways. You have obviously not been a fan of Forumla One for very long to make such unintelligent statements like this, "I LOVE F1, but if the drivers were dying I'd say close it down right now." You think 1994 was a banner year for Formula 1? There was even a lawsuit on that! You don't think that the FIA, FOCA, and the track owners made knee jerk reactions after the death of Senna? Yes, they made changes but it was AFTER the tragedy. The past 9 months have been very bad for Nascar. However, do you know how many Winston Cup Nascar drivers had died before the year 2000? As far as Winston Cup in the 90's, I believe there were two: Neil Bonnet's death in 1994(Daytona) and J.D. McDuffie in 1991(Watkins Glen). This is the same number of drivers that died in F1 in the 90's. If you add in the Busch Series, Craftsman Trucks, and ARCA, then I think there were 3 more(John Nemechek , Rodney Orr , Clifford Allison ). Formula 1 had two deaths in the 90's(Senna and Ratzenberger ). I do not know how many deaths could be attributed to the Formula One minor leagues such as Formula 3000. CART/IRL had 5 deaths in the 90's! Let's shut down the Indianapolis 500 as well!!(2 deaths in the 90's). How many deaths were there in Drag Racing, Rallying, Touring Cars, LeMans/Sportscars, Sprint cars, Cycling etc.? I don't know myself, but I will bet that there were deaths in every one of these series. You must not know your history well to believe that F1 is all about safety. Please read this article about the death of Ronnie Peterson at Monza in 1978. http://www.atlasf1.com/2000/ita/preview/peterson.html Another dark day in racing, Mario Andretti finally wins the F1 championship but loses friend and teammate Peterson. The lack of safety and poor respsonse from the safety teams here was appalling. This was nothing new in F1, and Jackie Sewart and many other drivers had been fighting for safer tracks, cars, and rules for years. To say that the F1 drivers of the sixties were not brave, heroic, or "real" drivers because "they raced knowing death was a real possibility" is just ludicrous!!! According to you, all race drivers from the past who helped to build this sport to what it is today "were simply foolish people who didn't value their lives very much." What kind of crap is this?!?!? I guess Juan Manuel Fangio, Mario Andretti, AJ Foyt, Richard Petty, Jackie Stewart, Emmerson Fittapaldi, Al Unser, Bobby Unser, Alberto Ascari, Aryton Senna, Alain Prost, Graham Hill, David Pearson, Gilles Villeneuve, Jody Scheckter, Dan Gurney, Jochen Rindt , Stirling Moss , Ray Harroun, Wilbur Shaw, Bill Vukovich, Rick Mears, Jim Clark, Johnny Rutherford, Nigel Mansell, Niki Lauda, and Nelson Piquet were all simply foolish people! Not pioneers of motorsport? Without these heroes(and hundreds more that I failed to mention) we would have no motorsport! Your lack of reasoning here boggles the mind!!! Using this logic, the heroes of the NASA space program, war veterans, firemen, poilcemen, emergency rescue workers, and the people who risk their lives in coal mines are all "simply foolish people". Straight from Atlas F1(www.atlasf1.com), here is the list of drivers killed in Formula One since 1950: "Among drivers who participated seriously in Formula One since the modern championship began in 1950, the list of those killed in racing cars looks something like this: Luigi Fagioli was killed in 1952. Felice Bonetto in 1953. Onofre Marimon in 1954. Alberto Ascari in 1955. Louis Rosier in 1956. Eugenio Castellotti and Alfonso de Portago in 1957. Peter Collins, Luigi Musso and Stewart Lewis-Evans in 1958. Jean Behra in 1959. Harry Schell in 1960. Wolfgang von Trips in 1961. Ricardo Rodriguez in 1962. Carel De Beaufort in 1964. Lorenzo Bandini in 1967. Jimmy Clark and Mike Spence in 1968. Lucien Bianchi and Gerhard Mitter in 1969. Jochen Rindt, Bruce McLaren and Piers Courage in 1970. Jo Siffert and Pedro Rodriguez in 1971. Jo Bonnier in 1972. Francois Cevert in 1973. Peter Revson and Silvio Moser in 1974. Mark Donahue in 1975. Tom Pryce in 1977. Ronnie Peterson in 1978. Patrick Depailler in 1980. Gilles Villeneuve and Ricardo Paletti in 1982. Elio de Angelis in 1986. Aryton Senna in 1994. Roland Ratzenberger in 1994. Nicki Lauda was maimed in a fiery crash, Clay Regazzoni was crippled for life, Moss suffered an accident that ended his career and nearly his life." Formula One absolutely does not have a "tremendous safety record". Based on your logic, Formula One should not even exist today because it would have been shut down in the 1950s' when the average was at least one death per year! To stereotype Nascar as all "about beer and crashes" is to show your lack of knowledge of motorsport in general. I've attended all forms of motorsport and was taught to appreciate them all at an early age. To say one form is superior is just showing uninformed prejudice. We are sad when someone dies, because death itself is tragic no matter the cause. People pay tribute because they care and they feel loss. Death and/or the chance of death or serious injury is part of all forms of auto racing. Based on your statements you may want to look into relocating to Switzerland where all forms of motorsport have been banned since 1955. I wish all forms of auto racing were 100% safe. If they were, we would probably all compete in them, instead of playing around with our computers and "toy" steering wheels thinking we are all high and mighty. However, it is not a safe sport. Neither are sports like mountain climbing, sky diving, kayaking, surfing, skiiing, X-treme sports, and to some extent hockey, rugby and football.(just to name a few). I sincerely hope that Nascar gets its act togther and makes some serious changes, but your arguements and accusations are just plain wrong. Normally, I would have just ignored a post like this assuming it was a troll. However, I have been around r.a.s for a long time, and I believe I have seen you make quality contributions to this group. I hope this was just a misstep on your part brought on by the difficult feelings we as racing fans always experience after the death of one of our heroes. It makes you feel guilty, it makes you feel sad, it makes you feel angry, it makes you feel like giving it up. I do not know what the answer is for you, but I honestly feel you owe this group an apology if you want to maintain any respect here. You are entitled to your opinion, true, but I am trying to give you the benefit of the doubt. If this is in fact your honest opinion, then I will use your own words to sum it up, "Pathetic". Don Chapman David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:DPHk6.464$[email hidden]... > I find it really ridiculous that people are acting as if the death of a > NASCAR driver is a tragedy. > > You knew it was going to happen, and so did I. It happens almost everyyear. > Three times last year alone. When you support an activity that you knowwill > result in the death of someone, then it's not a tragedy. It's simply > disgusting. > > I keep hearing the phrase, "Death is a part of auto racing, and these > drivers understand that but want to do it anyway." Bullshit. It isn't apart > of all types of auto racing. Just NASCAR. Formula 1 hasn't had a driverdie

Quoted text (7 lines)

> since 1994. Before that it was 1982. NASCAR is about beer and crashes. > Safety is a science in F1, and their record proves it. They have the top > experts in the world in charge of the safety of it's drivers. NASCAR is a > joke and the modern equivalent of the galdiator races. > > If you support NASCAR, then you support the INEVITABLE death of it's > drivers. How the hell are you then sad when one dies? Turns my stomach

when > I read or see the melodramatic tributes to a fan favorite. I LOVE F1, butif > the drivers were dying I'd say close it down right now. I have said onthis > newsgroup before that I didn't think the F1 drivers of the '60's asmodeled > in GPL were brave, heroic or "real" drivers because they raced knowingdeath > was a real possibility. I think they were simply foolish people who didn't > value their lives very much. > > There is NO reason why drivers have to die in NASCAR. It's simply a POORLY > run, bush league type of auto racing with fans that apparently don't TRULY > care about the safety of it's drivers. It's an embarrassment. Driversstill > have the choice of wearing open-faced helmets? Drivers have the choice to > wear a neck brace that obviously could have saved the lives of previousdead > drivers? > > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excusefor > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > Shut it down or just count the races until the next dead driver is pulled > from his car. Then the people who are in charge of NASCAR, and it's fanscan

Quoted text (11 lines)

> once again pay tribute to them. > > Pathetic. > > David G Fisher > > > > > >

> But you can't say ANYTHING negative about the US here because it is justnot > accpeted, it i part of american TRADITION (ha ha ha). Uh, really? I guess Nascar = American and F1=not American? I live in the US and I appreciate all forms of motor racing. I don't appreciate unsubstaniated blubbering though, but you can say it if you want. Who am I to stop you? > I am sure that if America had a sort of F1 championship at the time theroll > cage was invented they would have refused it for ten years arguing that > "it's for weenies" and "we are real men" and other bullshit. Huh?? Ever hear of the Indianaplois 500 and Indycar racing? Oh yeah, its only been around since 1911, I forgot. When was it that the "roll cage" was implemented in F1 again? I guess I missed it on Schumachers Ferrari last year. > Out of curiosity watch the TV ratings (and thus the money) on nascar'sNEXT > race, everybody will watch, waiting for blood... > Pathetic american media, and the sad thing is that the general public gets > to be like that too, but it's not their fault they have nothing else to > watch... Yeah, that's excatly what they are doing, waiting for blood. Yep, pathetic American media, so much worse than the "legitimate" media of the UK and Europe. And I guess all races and telecasts of the 1994 F1 season were cancelled throughout Europe after the deaths of Senna and Ratzenberger. How many seasons and races were cancelled? How many fans decided not to watch and go to the races? When did they decide to start that back up again? Yep, stupid American general public, we have nothing to watch but Nascar and nothing to drink but beer.

F1 evolves, nascar doesn't, american racing in g�n�ral doesn't. One day people will have to realize that oval racing has 2 sides : 1 FOR THE SHOW It's great, they go fast, they are close, all the sitting spectators can see a lot (if not all) of the track, for TV it' fantastic, less cameras to place..... 2 FOR THE DRIVERS It's dull, it makes for "funny" settings, if you make 1 tiny mistake you are out, no hope of catching back, if you hit a wall at 300+kph you life or death just depends on the angle you hit the wall at. So the question is, what do the rulers want to "push" the most ?, well in F1 it is quite obvious, not the show, threaded tires, pitstops, less wings, electronic "gizmos", of course for "THE SHOW" the race are not as fun to watch as they were in the 60's or 70's or even the 80's with the turbo cars. But the point here is not to talk about the intereste of the races, it is about whether it is "acceptable" to have detah in racing, in F1 it is not acceptable anymore and FIA will do ANYTHING (including making the races quite boring) to prevent death, in US motorsports, it is not the case. Once and for if you ONLY speak aout safety oval racing is a thing of the past, it should not exist anymore, in Le mans they built chicanes in the straight because people in very low and wide cars were reacing 400 kph, in Nascar they drive almost as fast with a fucking WALL with ABSOLUTELY no protection about 50 cm from the cars...silly isn't it ? But if you remove oval racing there goes the American "tradition" and that won't be accepted by the TV and thus the people, so be prepared for more of this, because you can't race on banked corners, with walls, with guys pushing you and expect nothing to happen. "Don Chapman" <[email hidden]> a �crit dans le message news: xfMk6.122587$[email hidden]... > David, > > I find it unbelieveable that a fan of auto racing would have an opinionlike > this. I am a fan of all motorsports and unfortunately they are all > dangerous. Death is a possibilty in ALL motorsports. To think differentlyis > to be very, very naive. Yes, Nascar does need to look at safety issues,and > they need to do it quickly, but to make claims that Formula 1 is thesafest, > and that they put safety first is ridiculous. No form of auto racing is100% > safe and never will be. Every day you drive your car, you are risking your > own life to some extent. Hundreds(maybe thousands) of deaths happeneveryday

Quoted text (7 lines)

> on the highways of the world due to stupidity, lack of safety features, > poorly designed roads and traffic signals, or just too much speed. Cars in > general are very dangerous, yet we don't shut down the highways. You have > obviously not been a fan of Forumla One for very long to make such > unintelligent statements like this, > > "I LOVE F1, but if the drivers were dying I'd say close it down right

now." > > You think 1994 was a banner year for Formula 1? There was even a lawsuiton > that! You don't think that the FIA, FOCA, and the track owners made knee > jerk reactions after the death of Senna? Yes, they made changes but it was > AFTER the tragedy. The past 9 months have been very bad for Nascar.However,

Quoted text (8 lines)

> do you know how many Winston Cup Nascar drivers had died before the year > 2000? As far as Winston Cup in the 90's, I believe there were two: Neil > Bonnet's death in 1994(Daytona) and J.D. McDuffie in 1991(Watkins Glen). > This is the same number of drivers that died in F1 in the 90's. If you add > in the Busch Series, Craftsman Trucks, and ARCA, then I think there were 3 > more(John Nemechek , Rodney Orr , Clifford Allison ). Formula 1 had two > deaths in the 90's(Senna and Ratzenberger ). I do not know how many deaths > could be attributed to the Formula One minor leagues such as Formula

3000. > CART/IRL had 5 deaths in the 90's! Let's shut down the Indianapolis 500 as > well!!(2 deaths in the 90's). How many deaths were there in Drag Racing, > Rallying, Touring Cars, LeMans/Sportscars, Sprint cars, Cycling etc.? I > don't know myself, but I will bet that there were deaths in every one of > these series. You must not know your history well to believe that F1 isall > about safety. Please read this article about the death of Ronnie Petersonat > Monza in 1978. http://www.atlasf1.com/2000/ita/preview/peterson.html > Another dark day in racing, Mario Andretti finally wins the F1championship > but loses friend and teammate Peterson. The lack of safety and poor > respsonse from the safety teams here was appalling. This was nothing newin > F1, and Jackie Sewart and many other drivers had been fighting for safer > tracks, cars, and rules for years. > > To say that the F1 drivers of the sixties were not brave, heroic, or"real" > drivers because "they raced knowing death was a real possibility" is just > ludicrous!!! According to you, all race drivers from the past who helpedto > build this sport to what it is today "were simply foolish people whodidn't > value their lives very much." What kind of crap is this?!?!? I guess Juan > Manuel Fangio, Mario Andretti, AJ Foyt, Richard Petty, Jackie Stewart, > Emmerson Fittapaldi, Al Unser, Bobby Unser, Alberto Ascari, Aryton Senna, > Alain Prost, Graham Hill, David Pearson, Gilles Villeneuve, JodyScheckter, > Dan Gurney, Jochen Rindt , Stirling Moss , Ray Harroun, Wilbur Shaw, Bill > Vukovich, Rick Mears, Jim Clark, Johnny Rutherford, Nigel Mansell, Niki > Lauda, and Nelson Piquet were all simply foolish people! Not pioneers of > motorsport? Without these heroes(and hundreds more that I failed tomention) > we would have no motorsport! Your lack of reasoning here boggles themind!!! > > Using this logic, the heroes of the NASA space program, war veterans, > firemen, poilcemen, emergency rescue workers, and the people who risktheir > lives in coal mines are all "simply foolish people". > > Straight from Atlas F1(www.atlasf1.com), here is the list of driverskilled > in Formula One since 1950: > > "Among drivers who participated seriously in Formula One since the modern > championship began in 1950, the list of those killed in racing cars looks > something like this: Luigi Fagioli was killed in 1952. Felice Bonetto in > 1953. Onofre Marimon in 1954. Alberto Ascari in 1955. Louis Rosier in1956. > Eugenio Castellotti and Alfonso de Portago in 1957. Peter Collins, Luigi > Musso and Stewart Lewis-Evans in 1958. Jean Behra in 1959. Harry Schell in > 1960. Wolfgang von Trips in 1961. Ricardo Rodriguez in 1962. Carel De > Beaufort in 1964. Lorenzo Bandini in 1967. Jimmy Clark and Mike Spence in > 1968. Lucien Bianchi and Gerhard Mitter in 1969. Jochen Rindt, BruceMcLaren > and Piers Courage in 1970. Jo Siffert and Pedro Rodriguez in 1971. Jo > Bonnier in 1972. Francois Cevert in 1973. Peter Revson and Silvio Moser in > 1974. Mark Donahue in 1975. Tom Pryce in 1977. Ronnie Peterson in 1978. > Patrick Depailler in 1980. Gilles Villeneuve and Ricardo Paletti in 1982. > Elio de Angelis in 1986. Aryton Senna in 1994. Roland Ratzenberger in1994. > Nicki Lauda was maimed in a fiery crash, Clay Regazzoni was crippled for > life, Moss suffered an accident that ended his career and nearly hislife." > > Formula One absolutely does not have a "tremendous safety record". Basedon > your logic, Formula One should not even exist today because it would have > been shut down in the 1950s' when the average was at least one death per > year! > > To stereotype Nascar as all "about beer and crashes" is to show your lackof > knowledge of motorsport in general. I've attended all forms of motorsport > and was taught to appreciate them all at an early age. To say one form is > superior is just showing uninformed prejudice. We are sad when someonedies, > because death itself is tragic no matter the cause. People pay tribute > because they care and they feel loss. Death and/or the chance of death or > serious injury is part of all forms of auto racing. Based on yourstatements

Quoted text (7 lines)

> you may want to look into relocating to Switzerland where all forms of > motorsport have been banned since 1955. > > I wish all forms of auto racing were 100% safe. If they were, we would > probably all compete in them, instead of playing around with our computers > and "toy" steering wheels thinking we are all high and mighty. However, it > is not a safe sport. Neither are sports like mountain climbing, sky

diving, > kayaking, surfing, skiiing, X-treme sports, and to some extent hockey,rugby > and football.(just to name a few). I sincerely hope that Nascar gets itsact > togther and makes some serious changes, but your arguements andaccusations > are just plain wrong. > > Normally, I would have just ignored a post like this assuming it was a > troll. However, I have been around r.a.s for a long time, and I believe I > have seen you make quality contributions to this group. I hope this wasjust

Quoted text (32 lines)

> a misstep on your part brought on by the difficult feelings we as racing > fans always experience after the death of one of our heroes. It makes you > feel guilty, it makes you feel sad, it makes you feel angry, it makes you > feel like giving it up. I do not know what the answer is for you, but I > honestly feel you owe this group an apology if you want to maintain any > respect here. You are entitled to your opinion, true, but I am trying to > give you the benefit of the doubt. If this is in fact your honest opinion, > then I will use your own words to sum it up, "Pathetic". > > Don Chapman > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:DPHk6.464$[email hidden]... > > I find it really ridiculous that people are acting as if the death of a > > NASCAR driver is a tragedy. > > > > You knew it was going to happen, and so did I. It happens almost every > year. > > Three times last year alone. When you support an activity that you know > will > > result in the death of someone, then it's not a tragedy. It's simply > > disgusting. > > > > I keep hearing the phrase, "Death is a part of auto racing, and these > > drivers understand that but want to do it anyway." Bullshit. It isn't a > part > > of all types of auto racing. Just NASCAR. Formula 1 hasn't had a driver > die > > since 1994. Before that it was 1982. NASCAR is about beer and crashes. > > Safety is a science in F1, and their record proves it. They have the top > > experts in the world in charge of the safety of it's drivers. NASCAR is

a > > joke and the modern equivalent of the galdiator races. > > > > If you support NASCAR, then you support the INEVITABLE death of it's > > drivers. How the hell are you then sad when one dies? Turns my stomach > when > > I read or see the melodramatic tributes to a fan favorite. I LOVE F1,but

Quoted text (8 lines)

> if > > the drivers were dying I'd say close it down right now. I have said on > this > > newsgroup before that I didn't think the F1 drivers of the '60's as > modeled > > in GPL were brave, heroic or "real" drivers because they raced knowing > death > > was a real possibility. I think they were simply foolish people who

didn't > > value their lives very much. > > > > There is NO reason why drivers have to die in NASCAR. It's simply aPOORLY > > run, bush league type of auto racing with fans that apparently don'tTRULY > > care about the safety of it's drivers. It's an embarrassment. Drivers > still > > have the choice of wearing open-faced helmets? Drivers have the choiceto

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > wear a neck brace that obviously could have saved the lives of previous > dead > > drivers? > > > > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excuse > for > > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > > > Shut it down or just count the races until the next dead driver is

pulled

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > from his car. Then the people who are in charge of NASCAR, and it's fans > can > > once again pay tribute to them. > > > > Pathetic. > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Hey... that's not so bad. If the beer were any good, that is. <g> Jan. =--- Don Chapman wrote... > <snip> > Yep, stupid American general public, we have nothing to watch > but Nascar and nothing to drink but beer. > >

Now Now Jan, We all don't drink beer here in the US you know!! We do have cheap "Thunderbird Wine" too! It's even better in a brown paper bag and especially while we're all hanging on street corners gettin` drunk...haha Cheers Thom_j. "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

| Hey... that's not so bad. If the beer were any good, that is. <g> | | Jan. | =--- | Don Chapman wrote... | > <snip> | > Yep, stupid American general public, we have nothing to watch | > but Nascar and nothing to drink but beer. | > | > | |

well, the sotry of the brown paper bag is typical of the american way of thinking, it's okay to get drunk on the street as long as you hide it in a paper bag, even if everybody knows what's in the paperbag. It's okay to fuck your secretary if you go to church on the sunday morning with your loving wife and kids "Thom j." <[email hidden]> a �crit dans le message news: gxOk6.2052$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (22 lines)

> Now Now Jan, We all don't drink beer here in the US you know!! We do > have cheap "Thunderbird Wine" too! It's even better in a brown paper bag > and especially while we're all hanging on street corners gettin` > drunk...haha > Cheers Thom_j. > > "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > | Hey... that's not so bad. If the beer were any good, that is. <g> > | > | Jan. > | =--- > | Don Chapman wrote... > | > <snip> > | > Yep, stupid American general public, we have nothing to watch > | > but Nascar and nothing to drink but beer. > | > > | > > | > | > >

I suppose to your view of the world only driver deaths count, do they? Are the officials who have died in connection with your beloved F1 since '94 not important enough to call for it to be shut down? Like the ticket says, " Motor racing is dangerous" To paraphase Clark, if it wasn't dangerous any moron, including Fisher, could do it. On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 04:51:47 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (47 lines)

>I find it really ridiculous that people are acting as if the death of a >NASCAR driver is a tragedy. > >You knew it was going to happen, and so did I. It happens almost every year. >Three times last year alone. When you support an activity that you know will >result in the death of someone, then it's not a tragedy. It's simply >disgusting. > >I keep hearing the phrase, "Death is a part of auto racing, and these >drivers understand that but want to do it anyway." Bullshit. It isn't a part >of all types of auto racing. Just NASCAR. Formula 1 hasn't had a driver die >since 1994. Before that it was 1982. NASCAR is about beer and crashes. >Safety is a science in F1, and their record proves it. They have the top >experts in the world in charge of the safety of it's drivers. NASCAR is a >joke and the modern equivalent of the galdiator races. > >If you support NASCAR, then you support the INEVITABLE death of it's >drivers. How the hell are you then sad when one dies? Turns my stomach when >I read or see the melodramatic tributes to a fan favorite. I LOVE F1, but if >the drivers were dying I'd say close it down right now. I have said on this >newsgroup before that I didn't think the F1 drivers of the '60's as modeled >in GPL were brave, heroic or "real" drivers because they raced knowing death >was a real possibility. I think they were simply foolish people who didn't >value their lives very much. > >There is NO reason why drivers have to die in NASCAR. It's simply a POORLY >run, bush league type of auto racing with fans that apparently don't TRULY >care about the safety of it's drivers. It's an embarrassment. Drivers still >have the choice of wearing open-faced helmets? Drivers have the choice to >wear a neck brace that obviously could have saved the lives of previous dead >drivers? > >If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excuse for >NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > >Shut it down or just count the races until the next dead driver is pulled >from his car. Then the people who are in charge of NASCAR, and it's fans can >once again pay tribute to them. > >Pathetic. > >David G Fisher > > > > >

I've been a NASCAR fan for 30 years and always bought the "safety is the first concern" line. I was wrong. It is time for a change. NASCAR and the track owners are making a mint off these drivers. They must move quickly to make the sport more safe. "Jcharm" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:c5Lk6.49608$[email hidden]... > In defense of the original poster's comments. F1 tracks do have a larger > margin of safety built into them than Nascar tracks - Tire walls, gravelrun > off, etc. Nascar tracks seem to resemble some kind of gladiator pit with > those concrete walls of death. You would have to agreee that having grass > on the infield leading to an inner concrete wall is unnecessary? > > All the drivers knew there would be plenty of carnage going into Daytonaas > well with there special rules. It would also make some sense if Nascar > requited those HANS neck devices because of the higher chances ofincidents.

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > You know they used to play footbal with leather helmets too. Perhasp it's > time for a change. > > > > Anthony Brooks <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > some funny stuff > > > > That's about the most BS I've read in awhile. A couple of things, you > can't > > compare F1 and Nascar. Two totally different types of racing. Race

marshal > > Paolo Ghislimberti was killed by flying debris after a collision in the > > Italian Grand Prix at Monza last year. And your comment about 60'sdrivers > > being foolish is just unbelievable. Nascar is not about beer andcrashes. > > It's about tight racing and going the full distance. F1 is starting to > look > > like a parade lap and the only passing done in the pits. I like allforms

Quoted text (9 lines)

> of > > racing, F1, Nascar, Cart, even IRL. I think you should of put a little > more > > thought in your post. > > Anthony Brooks > > > > > >

Every TROLL is entitiled to his opinion... -Chris- > I find it really ridiculous that people are acting as if the death of a > NASCAR driver is a tragedy. > > You knew it was going to happen, and so did I. It happens almost everyyear. > Three times last year alone. When you support an activity that you knowwill > result in the death of someone, then it's not a tragedy. It's simply > disgusting. > > I keep hearing the phrase, "Death is a part of auto racing, and these > drivers understand that but want to do it anyway." Bullshit. It isn't apart > of all types of auto racing. Just NASCAR. Formula 1 hasn't had a driverdie

Quoted text (7 lines)

> since 1994. Before that it was 1982. NASCAR is about beer and crashes. > Safety is a science in F1, and their record proves it. They have the top > experts in the world in charge of the safety of it's drivers. NASCAR is a > joke and the modern equivalent of the galdiator races. > > If you support NASCAR, then you support the INEVITABLE death of it's > drivers. How the hell are you then sad when one dies? Turns my stomach

when > I read or see the melodramatic tributes to a fan favorite. I LOVE F1, butif > the drivers were dying I'd say close it down right now. I have said onthis > newsgroup before that I didn't think the F1 drivers of the '60's asmodeled > in GPL were brave, heroic or "real" drivers because they raced knowingdeath > was a real possibility. I think they were simply foolish people who didn't > value their lives very much. > > There is NO reason why drivers have to die in NASCAR. It's simply a POORLY > run, bush league type of auto racing with fans that apparently don't TRULY > care about the safety of it's drivers. It's an embarrassment. Driversstill > have the choice of wearing open-faced helmets? Drivers have the choice to > wear a neck brace that obviously could have saved the lives of previousdead > drivers? > > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excusefor > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > Shut it down or just count the races until the next dead driver is pulled > from his car. Then the people who are in charge of NASCAR, and it's fanscan

Quoted text (12 lines)

> once again pay tribute to them. > > Pathetic. > > David G Fisher > > > > > > >

You fail to note how many more miles NASCAR drivers run--in Winston Cup alone, let alone the other series. There are many, many more opportunities for crashes and injuries. "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:vCIk6.847$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> No dead drivers in F1 since 1994. 1982 before that. > > Four dead in NASCAR in the past season + one race this year. > > NASCAR is a badly run auto racing series. F1 is light years ahead of it. > > David G Fisher > > > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:suIk6.14267$[email hidden]... > > >"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > > > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO

excuse > > for > > > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > > > > > Uh LOL sure David everybody is entitled to his opinion, whateverrationale > > it is.. ;) > > > > Did you scream that babbling in 1994 when Senna and Ratzenberger bothdied

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > the same weekend, when Wendlinger got a severe crash at Monaco, when > > Barrichello had a death-defying crash from the lack of safety in Imola's > > track configuration, etc..? > > > > Racing is dangerous. People have, are and will continue to be killed or > > severely injured. Deal with it, or stop watching it. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > > -- May the Downforce be with you... > > -- http://www.ymenard.com/ > > -- People think it must be fun to be a genius, but they don't realise

how > > hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world. > > > > > > >

I agree David. I don't think it's enough to say as many people here do that 'racing is dangerous'. The fact is some kinds of racing are a heck of a lot more dangerous than others, and every kind of racing *can* be safer. Nascar has no excuses either since they certainly have the money to make it safer. 4 deaths in 13 months is just way too much. One death a season is too much. If they can't make the tracks safer then they should at least give the drivers a really top notch survival shell. We don't get Nascar in the UK on tv, so I don't know alot of the details about safety rules there, but just from what i've read in the other posts here I'd say they need compulsory neck supports, compulsory full helmets and better side impact protection at least. One easy way of making it safer would be to move the driver to the centre of the car, instead of the left hand side. This would make side impacts considerably less dangerous. Also the artificially close racing is unnecessary. Rules which aide drafting cause accidents. I'd rather see the fastest guy pull away and win easily than the lottery you can get with CART/NASCAR finishes. Anyway, just some thoughts. "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:DPHk6.464$[email hidden]... > I find it really ridiculous that people are acting as if the death of a > NASCAR driver is a tragedy.<snip> > Shut it down or just count the races until the next dead driver is pulled > from his car. Then the people who are in charge of NASCAR, and it's fanscan > once again pay tribute to them. > > Pathetic. > > David G Fisher

Wow, I never realized until Txl pointed it out that the US was the only country that has immorality and hypocrisy. Thanks for the tip man. On my way to Amsterdam now! Txl <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:sMOk6.2431$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (34 lines)

> well, the sotry of the brown paper bag is typical of the american way of > thinking, it's okay to get drunk on the street as long as you hide it in a > paper bag, even if everybody knows what's in the paperbag. > It's okay to fuck your secretary if you go to church on the sunday morning > with your loving wife and kids > > > > "Thom j." <[email hidden]> a �crit dans le message news: > gxOk6.2052$[email hidden]... > > Now Now Jan, We all don't drink beer here in the US you know!! We do > > have cheap "Thunderbird Wine" too! It's even better in a brown paper bag > > and especially while we're all hanging on street corners gettin` > > drunk...haha > > Cheers Thom_j. > > > > "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > | Hey... that's not so bad. If the beer were any good, that is. <g> > > | > > | Jan. > > | =--- > > | Don Chapman wrote... > > | > <snip> > > | > Yep, stupid American general public, we have nothing to watch > > | > but Nascar and nothing to drink but beer. > > | > > > | > > > | > > | > > > > > >

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:DPHk6.464$[email hidden]... > Pathetic. Yes your post was, I agree. I guess CART and the IRL should be shut down for the same reasons also? -- [email hidden]

That's an unreasonable comment. Whether the people who die are safety crews, fans or drivers, the *total number* of people killed in Nascar over a sustained period is clearly way higher than F1. "Peter Holt" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> I suppose to your view of the world only driver deaths count, do they? > Are the officials who have died in connection with your beloved F1 > since '94 not important enough to call for it to be shut down? > > Like the ticket says, " Motor racing is dangerous" > > To paraphase Clark, if it wasn't dangerous any moron, including > Fisher, could do it.

**** Post for FREE via your newsreader at post.usenet.com **** You, Sir, are one inconsiderate, pompus ass. You pretend to know what _I_ feel about this issue? I'm gonna stop now before I lose control... -Larry "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:DPHk6.464$[email hidden]... > I find it really ridiculous that people are acting as if the death of a > NASCAR driver is a tragedy. > > You knew it was going to happen, and so did I. It happens almost everyyear. > Three times last year alone. When you support an activity that you knowwill > result in the death of someone, then it's not a tragedy. It's simply > disgusting. > > I keep hearing the phrase, "Death is a part of auto racing, and these > drivers understand that but want to do it anyway." Bullshit. It isn't apart > of all types of auto racing. Just NASCAR. Formula 1 hasn't had a driverdie

Quoted text (7 lines)

> since 1994. Before that it was 1982. NASCAR is about beer and crashes. > Safety is a science in F1, and their record proves it. They have the top > experts in the world in charge of the safety of it's drivers. NASCAR is a > joke and the modern equivalent of the galdiator races. > > If you support NASCAR, then you support the INEVITABLE death of it's > drivers. How the hell are you then sad when one dies? Turns my stomach

when > I read or see the melodramatic tributes to a fan favorite. I LOVE F1, butif > the drivers were dying I'd say close it down right now. I have said onthis > newsgroup before that I didn't think the F1 drivers of the '60's asmodeled > in GPL were brave, heroic or "real" drivers because they raced knowingdeath > was a real possibility. I think they were simply foolish people who didn't > value their lives very much. > > There is NO reason why drivers have to die in NASCAR. It's simply a POORLY > run, bush league type of auto racing with fans that apparently don't TRULY > care about the safety of it's drivers. It's an embarrassment. Driversstill > have the choice of wearing open-faced helmets? Drivers have the choice to > wear a neck brace that obviously could have saved the lives of previousdead > drivers? > > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excusefor > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > Shut it down or just count the races until the next dead driver is pulled > from his car. Then the people who are in charge of NASCAR, and it's fanscan

Quoted text (11 lines)

> once again pay tribute to them. > > Pathetic. > > David G Fisher > > > > > >

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= *** Usenet.com - The #1 Usenet Newsgroup Service on The Planet! *** http://www.usenet.com -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Wrong, wrong, wrong! You are digging a deeper hole for yourself. > F1 evolves, nascar doesn't, american racing in g�n�ral doesn't. > One day people will have to realize that oval racing has 2 sides : Please give me some specific examples here. I am working on it now, but many of the changes to cockpit, helmets, and tracks that are used in F1 were designed and implemented by US companies and/or manufacturers competing in "American" racing, whatever that means. I am doing my research now to give you the facts. Please do the same before posting that american racing does not evolve. > 2 FOR THE DRIVERS > > It's dull, it makes for "funny" settings, if you make 1 tiny mistake youare > out, no hope of catching back, if you hit a wall at 300+kph you life or > death just depends on the angle you hit the wall at. It's dull for the drivers? Again, please show me some quotes from any drivers who say that oval racing is dull for them. Oh, and by the way, Jacques Villenueve won the Indy 500 after being 2 laps down early in the race. In 1966, Jimmy Clark came in second(some people still say he won) in the Indy 500 after spinning out 3 times. Danny Sullivan won the 500 after a full 360 spin. Yes, if you hit the wall its usually over, but that is true in ALL forms of racing. In fact, in Nascar on many tracks, brushes with the wall cause no problems at all and the drivers still go on to win. The fragile cars of F1 can take virtually no contact with wall or any other car and they are out of the race entirely. Also, I'm sure its very exciting for the Minardi's to run alone several laps down every race only worrying about clearing the way for the leaders every few laps. Not that sounds boring. This is just not a valid arguement on your part. > So the question is, what do the rulers want to "push" the most ?, well inF1 > it is quite obvious, not the show, threaded tires, pitstops, less wings, > electronic "gizmos", of course for "THE SHOW" the race are not as fun to > watch as they were in the 60's or 70's or even the 80's with the turbocars. > But the point here is not to talk about the intereste of the races, it is > about whether it is "acceptable" to have detah in racing, in F1 it is not > acceptable anymore and FIA will do ANYTHING (including making the races > quite boring) to prevent death, in US motorsports, it is not the case. Oh my, you really think that the most important thing in F1 is safety and not the show, or circus, as most people call it. Look, I love F1 and I have obvioulsy been following it alot longer than you have. Please go read some history books on F1 to discover how ridiculous this statement is. Better yet, call Jackie Stewart. It is not acceptable to have death in any form of racing, but the possibility will always be part of it!!!!! I guess it must be pretty stupid of F1 to have allowed the "show" to come back to the US and run at Indy at the OVAL. Oh my! This completely blows your arguement out of the water. If oval racing should be banned because it is unsafe, and the FIA is only concerned about safety for Formula One races, then it surely seems stupid of them to come to Indy and run backwards on the oval between (gasp) concrete walls at 200mph. Oh yeah, they ran this in the RAIN for pete's sake! Even Nascar and CART/IRL are not that dumb. Please! You know why they came, because it was the biggest money maker of the year, and the highest atteneded Formula One race EVER! This is proved by the fact that the FIA awarded Indy the event of the year. Oh yeah, and the races are not boring in F1 because of safety regulations! They are boring because there is so much disparity between the top teams and the rest of the field. Lastly, if FIA was so concerned about safety, they would do something about the standing starts which have to be the most dangerous 60 seconds in all of motorsport. > But if you remove oval racing there goes the American "tradition" and that > won't be accepted by the TV and thus the people, so be prepared for moreof > this, because you can't race on banked corners, with walls, with guys > pushing you and expect nothing to happen. Uh, if you read my full post you would have seen a list of almost 40 drivers who died in Formula One racing. Not on an oval!!. Racing deaths are not limited to ovals! In the past 5 years, CART unfortunatley lost 3 drivers. Only one of those deaths happened on an oval. Please do not post again until you have your facts straight. Don Chapman

**** Post for FREE via your newsreader at post.usenet.com **** Don, Your post was excellent, and well thought-out. Far more elliquent than mine :) Thanks :) -Larry "Don Chapman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:xfMk6.122587$[email hidden]... > David, > > I find it unbelieveable that a fan of auto racing would have an opinionlike > this. I am a fan of all motorsports and unfortunately they are all > dangerous. Death is a possibilty in ALL motorsports. To think differentlyis > to be very, very naive. Yes, Nascar does need to look at safety issues,and > they need to do it quickly, but to make claims that Formula 1 is thesafest, > and that they put safety first is ridiculous. No form of auto racing is100% > safe and never will be. Every day you drive your car, you are risking your > own life to some extent. Hundreds(maybe thousands) of deaths happeneveryday

Quoted text (7 lines)

> on the highways of the world due to stupidity, lack of safety features, > poorly designed roads and traffic signals, or just too much speed. Cars in > general are very dangerous, yet we don't shut down the highways. You have > obviously not been a fan of Forumla One for very long to make such > unintelligent statements like this, > > "I LOVE F1, but if the drivers were dying I'd say close it down right

now." > > You think 1994 was a banner year for Formula 1? There was even a lawsuiton > that! You don't think that the FIA, FOCA, and the track owners made knee > jerk reactions after the death of Senna? Yes, they made changes but it was > AFTER the tragedy. The past 9 months have been very bad for Nascar.However,

Quoted text (8 lines)

> do you know how many Winston Cup Nascar drivers had died before the year > 2000? As far as Winston Cup in the 90's, I believe there were two: Neil > Bonnet's death in 1994(Daytona) and J.D. McDuffie in 1991(Watkins Glen). > This is the same number of drivers that died in F1 in the 90's. If you add > in the Busch Series, Craftsman Trucks, and ARCA, then I think there were 3 > more(John Nemechek , Rodney Orr , Clifford Allison ). Formula 1 had two > deaths in the 90's(Senna and Ratzenberger ). I do not know how many deaths > could be attributed to the Formula One minor leagues such as Formula

3000. > CART/IRL had 5 deaths in the 90's! Let's shut down the Indianapolis 500 as > well!!(2 deaths in the 90's). How many deaths were there in Drag Racing, > Rallying, Touring Cars, LeMans/Sportscars, Sprint cars, Cycling etc.? I > don't know myself, but I will bet that there were deaths in every one of > these series. You must not know your history well to believe that F1 isall > about safety. Please read this article about the death of Ronnie Petersonat > Monza in 1978. http://www.atlasf1.com/2000/ita/preview/peterson.html > Another dark day in racing, Mario Andretti finally wins the F1championship > but loses friend and teammate Peterson. The lack of safety and poor > respsonse from the safety teams here was appalling. This was nothing newin > F1, and Jackie Sewart and many other drivers had been fighting for safer > tracks, cars, and rules for years. > > To say that the F1 drivers of the sixties were not brave, heroic, or"real" > drivers because "they raced knowing death was a real possibility" is just > ludicrous!!! According to you, all race drivers from the past who helpedto > build this sport to what it is today "were simply foolish people whodidn't > value their lives very much." What kind of crap is this?!?!? I guess Juan > Manuel Fangio, Mario Andretti, AJ Foyt, Richard Petty, Jackie Stewart, > Emmerson Fittapaldi, Al Unser, Bobby Unser, Alberto Ascari, Aryton Senna, > Alain Prost, Graham Hill, David Pearson, Gilles Villeneuve, JodyScheckter, > Dan Gurney, Jochen Rindt , Stirling Moss , Ray Harroun, Wilbur Shaw, Bill > Vukovich, Rick Mears, Jim Clark, Johnny Rutherford, Nigel Mansell, Niki > Lauda, and Nelson Piquet were all simply foolish people! Not pioneers of > motorsport? Without these heroes(and hundreds more that I failed tomention) > we would have no motorsport! Your lack of reasoning here boggles themind!!! > > Using this logic, the heroes of the NASA space program, war veterans, > firemen, poilcemen, emergency rescue workers, and the people who risktheir > lives in coal mines are all "simply foolish people". > > Straight from Atlas F1(www.atlasf1.com), here is the list of driverskilled > in Formula One since 1950: > > "Among drivers who participated seriously in Formula One since the modern > championship began in 1950, the list of those killed in racing cars looks > something like this: Luigi Fagioli was killed in 1952. Felice Bonetto in > 1953. Onofre Marimon in 1954. Alberto Ascari in 1955. Louis Rosier in1956. > Eugenio Castellotti and Alfonso de Portago in 1957. Peter Collins, Luigi > Musso and Stewart Lewis-Evans in 1958. Jean Behra in 1959. Harry Schell in > 1960. Wolfgang von Trips in 1961. Ricardo Rodriguez in 1962. Carel De > Beaufort in 1964. Lorenzo Bandini in 1967. Jimmy Clark and Mike Spence in > 1968. Lucien Bianchi and Gerhard Mitter in 1969. Jochen Rindt, BruceMcLaren > and Piers Courage in 1970. Jo Siffert and Pedro Rodriguez in 1971. Jo > Bonnier in 1972. Francois Cevert in 1973. Peter Revson and Silvio Moser in > 1974. Mark Donahue in 1975. Tom Pryce in 1977. Ronnie Peterson in 1978. > Patrick Depailler in 1980. Gilles Villeneuve and Ricardo Paletti in 1982. > Elio de Angelis in 1986. Aryton Senna in 1994. Roland Ratzenberger in1994. > Nicki Lauda was maimed in a fiery crash, Clay Regazzoni was crippled for > life, Moss suffered an accident that ended his career and nearly hislife." > > Formula One absolutely does not have a "tremendous safety record". Basedon > your logic, Formula One should not even exist today because it would have > been shut down in the 1950s' when the average was at least one death per > year! > > To stereotype Nascar as all "about beer and crashes" is to show your lackof > knowledge of motorsport in general. I've attended all forms of motorsport > and was taught to appreciate them all at an early age. To say one form is > superior is just showing uninformed prejudice. We are sad when someonedies, > because death itself is tragic no matter the cause. People pay tribute > because they care and they feel loss. Death and/or the chance of death or > serious injury is part of all forms of auto racing. Based on yourstatements

Quoted text (7 lines)

> you may want to look into relocating to Switzerland where all forms of > motorsport have been banned since 1955. > > I wish all forms of auto racing were 100% safe. If they were, we would > probably all compete in them, instead of playing around with our computers > and "toy" steering wheels thinking we are all high and mighty. However, it > is not a safe sport. Neither are sports like mountain climbing, sky

diving, > kayaking, surfing, skiiing, X-treme sports, and to some extent hockey,rugby > and football.(just to name a few). I sincerely hope that Nascar gets itsact > togther and makes some serious changes, but your arguements andaccusations > are just plain wrong. > > Normally, I would have just ignored a post like this assuming it was a > troll. However, I have been around r.a.s for a long time, and I believe I > have seen you make quality contributions to this group. I hope this wasjust

Quoted text (32 lines)

> a misstep on your part brought on by the difficult feelings we as racing > fans always experience after the death of one of our heroes. It makes you > feel guilty, it makes you feel sad, it makes you feel angry, it makes you > feel like giving it up. I do not know what the answer is for you, but I > honestly feel you owe this group an apology if you want to maintain any > respect here. You are entitled to your opinion, true, but I am trying to > give you the benefit of the doubt. If this is in fact your honest opinion, > then I will use your own words to sum it up, "Pathetic". > > Don Chapman > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:DPHk6.464$[email hidden]... > > I find it really ridiculous that people are acting as if the death of a > > NASCAR driver is a tragedy. > > > > You knew it was going to happen, and so did I. It happens almost every > year. > > Three times last year alone. When you support an activity that you know > will > > result in the death of someone, then it's not a tragedy. It's simply > > disgusting. > > > > I keep hearing the phrase, "Death is a part of auto racing, and these > > drivers understand that but want to do it anyway." Bullshit. It isn't a > part > > of all types of auto racing. Just NASCAR. Formula 1 hasn't had a driver > die > > since 1994. Before that it was 1982. NASCAR is about beer and crashes. > > Safety is a science in F1, and their record proves it. They have the top > > experts in the world in charge of the safety of it's drivers. NASCAR is

a > > joke and the modern equivalent of the galdiator races. > > > > If you support NASCAR, then you support the INEVITABLE death of it's > > drivers. How the hell are you then sad when one dies? Turns my stomach > when > > I read or see the melodramatic tributes to a fan favorite. I LOVE F1,but

Quoted text (8 lines)

> if > > the drivers were dying I'd say close it down right now. I have said on > this > > newsgroup before that I didn't think the F1 drivers of the '60's as > modeled > > in GPL were brave, heroic or "real" drivers because they raced knowing > death > > was a real possibility. I think they were simply foolish people who

didn't > > value their lives very much. > > > > There is NO reason why drivers have to die in NASCAR. It's simply aPOORLY > > run, bush league type of auto racing with fans that apparently don'tTRULY > > care about the safety of it's drivers. It's an embarrassment. Drivers > still > > have the choice of wearing open-faced helmets? Drivers have the choiceto

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > wear a neck brace that obviously could have saved the lives of previous > dead > > drivers? > > > > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excuse > for > > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > > > Shut it down or just count the races until the next dead driver is

pulled

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > from his car. Then the people who are in charge of NASCAR, and it's fans > can > > once again pay tribute to them. > > > > Pathetic. > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= *** Usenet.com - The #1 Usenet Newsgroup Service on The Planet! *** http://www.usenet.com -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

No, it's not. Fisher implied that there had been no deaths in F1 since since '94. That's not true. Simple as that. On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 13:26:10 GMT, "Simon Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (16 lines)

>That's an unreasonable comment. Whether the people who die are safety >crews, fans or drivers, the *total number* of people killed in Nascar over a >sustained period is clearly way higher than F1. > >"Peter Holt" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> I suppose to your view of the world only driver deaths count, do they? >> Are the officials who have died in connection with your beloved F1 >> since '94 not important enough to call for it to be shut down? >> >> Like the ticket says, " Motor racing is dangerous" >> >> To paraphase Clark, if it wasn't dangerous any moron, including >> Fisher, could do it. > >

And here I thought it was just your Sim Racing taste that was incredibly low. Now I see its just a general sign of your intellect. Sad. -- Scott B. Husted PA-Scott The Pits: PowerSims Magazine (http://www.theuspits.com) David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:DPHk6.464$[email hidden]... > I find it really ridiculous that people are acting as if the death of a > NASCAR driver is a tragedy. > > You knew it was going to happen, and so did I. It happens almost every year. > Three times last year alone. When you support an activity that you know will > result in the death of someone, then it's not a tragedy. It's simply > disgusting. > > I keep hearing the phrase, "Death is a part of auto racing, and these > drivers understand that but want to do it anyway." Bullshit. It isn't a part > of all types of auto racing. Just NASCAR. Formula 1 hasn't had a driver die > since 1994. Before that it was 1982. NASCAR is about beer and crashes. > Safety is a science in F1, and their record proves it. They have the top > experts in the world in charge of the safety of it's drivers. NASCAR is a > joke and the modern equivalent of the galdiator races. > > If you support NASCAR, then you support the INEVITABLE death of it's > drivers. How the hell are you then sad when one dies? Turns my stomach when > I read or see the melodramatic tributes to a fan favorite. I LOVE F1, but if > the drivers were dying I'd say close it down right now. I have said on this > newsgroup before that I didn't think the F1 drivers of the '60's as modeled > in GPL were brave, heroic or "real" drivers because they raced knowing death > was a real possibility. I think they were simply foolish people who didn't > value their lives very much. > > There is NO reason why drivers have to die in NASCAR. It's simply a POORLY > run, bush league type of auto racing with fans that apparently don't TRULY > care about the safety of it's drivers. It's an embarrassment. Drivers still > have the choice of wearing open-faced helmets? Drivers have the choice to > wear a neck brace that obviously could have saved the lives of previous dead > drivers? > > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excuse for > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > Shut it down or just count the races until the next dead driver is pulled > from his car. Then the people who are in charge of NASCAR, and it's fans can > once again pay tribute to them. > > Pathetic. > > David G Fisher > > > > > >

Yeah.. F1 is the most advanced, high tech, orchestrated elitist parade in auto racing. If you haven't figured it out yet, autoracing is dangerous no matter what form of it you enjoy or watch. -- Scott B. Husted PA-Scott The Pits: PowerSims Magazine (http://www.theuspits.com) David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:vCIk6.847$[email hidden]... > No dead drivers in F1 since 1994. 1982 before that. > > Four dead in NASCAR in the past season + one race this year. > > NASCAR is a badly run auto racing series. F1 is light years ahead of it. > > David G Fisher > > > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:suIk6.14267$[email hidden]... > > >"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > > > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excuse > > for > > > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > > > > > Uh LOL sure David everybody is entitled to his opinion, whatever rationale > > it is.. ;) > > > > Did you scream that babbling in 1994 when Senna and Ratzenberger both died > > the same weekend, when Wendlinger got a severe crash at Monaco, when > > Barrichello had a death-defying crash from the lack of safety in Imola's > > track configuration, etc..? > > > > Racing is dangerous. People have, are and will continue to be killed or > > severely injured. Deal with it, or stop watching it. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > > -- May the Downforce be with you... > > -- http://www.ymenard.com/ > > -- People think it must be fun to be a genius, but they don't realise how > > hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world. > > > > > > >

On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 05:46:03 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >No dead drivers in F1 since 1994. 1982 before that. > >Four dead in NASCAR in the past season + one race this year. > >NASCAR is a badly run auto racing series. F1 is light years ahead of it. It's hard to compare apples to oranges. But better that than apples and fruitcakes... One thing to consider is the man-mileage accumulated. The 2000 F1 season consisted of 3214 miles. With 22 drivers, the season consisted of about 70,700 man-miles (actually less, due to drivers dropping out of races, but this assumption actually favors more accumulated milage in F1 than NASCAR). The 2000 NASCAR Winston Cup season was about 13,500 miles. With 43 drivers, the season consisted of 580,000 man-miles, or about 8.2 times the length of the F1 season. Also, since you want include BGN and CTS deaths to pad your argument, we've got to include the mileage as well. Let's pick arbitrary numbers of 8100 miles (60% distance) times 38 drivers for ~308,000 BGN man-miles, 6750 miles (50% distance) times 32 drivers for ~216,000 CTS man-miles. So for 2000, we have F1 running 70,700 man-miles with no driver fatalities (but one racing official fatality). We have NASCAR WC/BGN/CTS running 1,104,000 man-miles with four fatalities (I'm giving you this year's Daytona as a freebie) or one fatality per 276,000 man-miles. If you extrapolate F1's man-mileage numbers back to 1994 (seven years, 1994-2000), you get two driver fatalities over 495,000 man-miles, or one fatality per 248,000 man-miles. So, David, one more time, which series is it that "safety is a science" and which series "is a joke and the modern equivalent of the galdiator races"? Sorry, but from the numbers I'm having trouble making the crystal-clear distinction that you seem to be able to divine. "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

David G Fisher wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > Fine. I'll retract my call for it to be shut down. > > From now on I'll just continue to call it a crap form of auto racing that > has far more in common with the WWF than anything else. > > 49 year old drivers? Artificial close racing? Dead bodies? Beer, beer, and > more beer.

Cheers. And bottoms up. -- Fester Restrictor plate racing killed Dale Earnhardt.

>NASCAR is a badly run auto racing series. F1 is light years ahead of it. > Only because Senna died. Find something else to do. - Alan Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

>49 year old drivers? Two words: Nigel Mansell. >Artificial close racing? Pocono last year was artifical? Was Bristol? Martinsville? > Dead bodies? CART just pulled 2 out in 1999, and F1 had a course worker killed. >Beer, beer, and >more beer. There's no beer in Europe? Damn, a lot has changed since I was there in 1992. - Alan Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

Two words: Nigel Mansell. Pocono last year was artifical? Was Bristol? Martinsville? CART just pulled 2 out in 1999, and F1 had a course worker killed. There's no beer in Europe? Damn, a lot has changed since I was there in 1992. - Alan Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

at least in amsterdam they don't hide the prostitutes or the joints in brown paper bag, you picked JUST the perfect WRONG example, Holland legalized the "pot-smoking" long ago because people were doing it anyway, no point hiding things everybody does... "Don Chapman" <[email hidden]> a �crit dans le message news: ffPk6.122776$[email hidden]... > Wow, I never realized until Txl pointed it out that the US was the only > country that has immorality and hypocrisy. Thanks for the tip man. On myway > to Amsterdam now! > > Txl <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:sMOk6.2431$[email hidden]... > > well, the sotry of the brown paper bag is typical of the american way of > > thinking, it's okay to get drunk on the street as long as you hide it ina > > paper bag, even if everybody knows what's in the paperbag. > > It's okay to fuck your secretary if you go to church on the sundaymorning

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > with your loving wife and kids > > > > > > > > "Thom j." <[email hidden]> a �crit dans le message news: > > gxOk6.2052$[email hidden]... > > > Now Now Jan, We all don't drink beer here in the US you know!! We do > > > have cheap "Thunderbird Wine" too! It's even better in a brown paper

bag > > > and especially while we're all hanging on street corners gettin` > > > drunk...haha > > > Cheers Thom_j. > > > > > > "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote inmessage

Quoted text (20 lines)

> > > news:[email hidden]... > > > | Hey... that's not so bad. If the beer were any good, that is. <g> > > > | > > > | Jan. > > > | =--- > > > | Don Chapman wrote... > > > | > <snip> > > > | > Yep, stupid American general public, we have nothing to watch > > > | > but Nascar and nothing to drink but beer. > > > | > > > > | > > > > | > > > | > > > > > > > > > > > > >

wrong example again, france is the #1 travel destination in the world, in front of brownpaperland, check this with the brownpaperland minitry of tourism. "rrevved" <[email hidden]> a �crit dans le message news: [email hidden]... > On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 12:46:16 GMT, "Txl" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >well, the sotry of the brown paper bag is typical of the american way of > >thinking, it's okay to get drunk on the street as long as you hide it ina > >paper bag, even if everybody knows what's in the paperbag. > >It's okay to fuck your secretary if you go to church on the sundaymorning > >with your loving wife and kids > > Note to group: > > Any other questions as to why France is not a prime vacation choice? >

no, I didn't say anything about exciting, but there are no dead people, I'm not saying it is good or bad, I am just saying that FIA wants safetay and nascar wants show... "rrevved" <[email hidden]> a �crit dans le message news: [email hidden]... > On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 11:05:34 GMT, "Txl" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > > in Le mans they built chicanes in the > >straight because people in very low and wide cars were reacing 400 kph,in > >Nascar they drive almost as fast with a fucking WALL with ABSOLUTELY no > >protection about 50 cm from the cars...silly isn't it ? > > Exciting, isn't it? > >

mayeb you are right, proobably you are right, but do you thing the death of earnhardt will change things in nascar the way senna's death changed them in F1 ? "Alan Conceicao" <[email hidden]> a �crit dans le message news: [email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> >NASCAR is a badly run auto racing series. F1 is light years ahead of it. > > > > Only because Senna died. Find something else to do. > > - > Alan > > Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: > "The Last American Hero" > R.I.P. >

Unfortunately, while this is your opinion there are very few here that either need it or want it. What do they say " If you have nothing good to say, keep it to yourself" . I'm afraid to say this applies in this case. I think everyone is aware of what needs to be done and hopefully it does, what's not needed now is the negativity. Nascar will live on and hopefully become a safer sport. "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:K7Ik6.569$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (27 lines)

> BTW, I haven't posted any opinions about this in any other thread. I'm not > out to ruin anyone's tributes to Earnhardt, but I simply find this whole > situation ridiculous and wanted to say so. > > David G Fisher > > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:DPHk6.464$[email hidden]... > > I find it really ridiculous that people are acting as if the death of a > > NASCAR driver is a tragedy. > > > > You knew it was going to happen, and so did I. It happens almost every > year. > > Three times last year alone. When you support an activity that you know > will > > result in the death of someone, then it's not a tragedy. It's simply > > disgusting. > > > > I keep hearing the phrase, "Death is a part of auto racing, and these > > drivers understand that but want to do it anyway." Bullshit. It isn't a > part > > of all types of auto racing. Just NASCAR. Formula 1 hasn't had a driver > die > > since 1994. Before that it was 1982. NASCAR is about beer and crashes. > > Safety is a science in F1, and their record proves it. They have the top > > experts in the world in charge of the safety of it's drivers. NASCAR is

a > > joke and the modern equivalent of the galdiator races. > > > > If you support NASCAR, then you support the INEVITABLE death of it's > > drivers. How the hell are you then sad when one dies? Turns my stomach > when > > I read or see the melodramatic tributes to a fan favorite. I LOVE F1,but

Quoted text (8 lines)

> if > > the drivers were dying I'd say close it down right now. I have said on > this > > newsgroup before that I didn't think the F1 drivers of the '60's as > modeled > > in GPL were brave, heroic or "real" drivers because they raced knowing > death > > was a real possibility. I think they were simply foolish people who

didn't > > value their lives very much. > > > > There is NO reason why drivers have to die in NASCAR. It's simply aPOORLY > > run, bush league type of auto racing with fans that apparently don'tTRULY > > care about the safety of it's drivers. It's an embarrassment. Drivers > still > > have the choice of wearing open-faced helmets? Drivers have the choiceto

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > wear a neck brace that obviously could have saved the lives of previous > dead > > drivers? > > > > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excuse > for > > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > > > Shut it down or just count the races until the next dead driver is

pulled

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > from his car. Then the people who are in charge of NASCAR, and it's fans > can > > once again pay tribute to them. > > > > Pathetic. > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > > > > > > > >

>If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excuse for >NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. To me it seems that F1 just had incredible luck during the last years. That luck can run out any moment - F1 will never be safe, just as every kind of motorsport I can think of. In fact, simply living isn't such a safe occupation either not to mention driving any kind of car. NASCAR is probably much safer than the german Autobahn cause in NASCAR those guys know what they're doing.

> sure, david. but just set the clock back a few years.... i dunno, say1994. > that year, there were 0 winston cup series deaths, and 2 F1 deaths in *one > weekend*. looking at that data set, you'd have to be crying for the > shuttering of F1. Actually, there were two deaths in 1994 in Winston Cup....Rodney Orr and Neil Bonnett... Dave

> (here's a hint- sometimes, people who enjoy F1 also enjoy beer, too. no, > really!) Even worse...wine...higher alcohol percentage... dave

David G Fisher wrote: >Formula 1 hasn't had a driver die since 1994. Before that it was 1982. What about Elio de Angelis??? -- Cheers, Robin Lord - Trance DJ & Sim Racer. http://www.oppositelock.co.uk N�rburgring and Grand Prix Legends

On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 19:04:40 +0100, Alexander Marx <[email hidden]> wrote: > >>If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excuse for >>NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > >To me it seems that F1 just had incredible luck during the last years. Luck, schmluck. Since the 70's, never mind earlier, F1 is several order of magnitudes safer. Almost all of the fatal accidents in the 70's would have been non-fatal with today's safety standards. Just see the '99 Spa start carnage. If that happened in say 1972 half the field would have either gotten crushed or burnt to crisps. Or both. I think we can say, backed up with statistics for the last 20 years, that NASCAR/CART/Indy/IRL doesn't compare that favourably with F1 with regards to safety. I personally think it is because of the nature of oval racing to a large degree. >That luck can run out any moment - F1 will never be safe, just as >every kind of motorsport I can think of. In fact, simply living isn't >such a safe occupation either not to mention driving any kind of car. >NASCAR is probably much safer than the german Autobahn cause in NASCAR >those guys know what they're doing. Logical fallacy, or very odd reasoning. Just because the risk != 0, it doesn't matter to what degree? Smoke a cigarette and playing russian roulette, same thing? Thank god the airline industry doesn't go by the same reasoning. /Magnus GPLRank hcp: -41.66

Hey guyzz dont forget the *brown bag* that I mentioned in a prior post! Now go get some cheap wine & just hang'out on the street corners with the other wine'os..lol NGs never cease to *amaze me* on how a thread will develop or shall I say not-develop.. "O" Well ain't it fun!! <G> Cheers Thom_j. "O" Yea btw I don't drink any form of alcohol at all but u'all enjoy! :o) "Dave St.Onge" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:LCTk6.479$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

| > (here's a hint- sometimes, people who enjoy F1 also enjoy beer, too. no, | > really!) | | | Even worse...wine...higher alcohol percentage... | | dave | | |

David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:vCIk6.847$[email hidden]... > No dead drivers in F1 since 1994. 1982 before that. 1986 actually. Remember Elio? MS

If we can have one of those burning oil drums as well, I'm on my way ;-) MS Thom j. <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:gxOk6.2052$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (22 lines)

> Now Now Jan, We all don't drink beer here in the US you know!! We do > have cheap "Thunderbird Wine" too! It's even better in a brown paper bag > and especially while we're all hanging on street corners gettin` > drunk...haha > Cheers Thom_j. > > "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > | Hey... that's not so bad. If the beer were any good, that is. <g> > | > | Jan. > | =--- > | Don Chapman wrote... > | > <snip> > | > Yep, stupid American general public, we have nothing to watch > | > but Nascar and nothing to drink but beer. > | > > | > > | > | > >

Man, I gotta hand it to you: this is the single most incredible piece of flamebait I've seen in this forum in five or so years of dropping in here -- true Troll-Hall-of-Fame-quality nonsense. I award you the Fran�ois Menard Memorial Golden Turd with dingleberry clusters and undigested peanuts. Bravo! U R awesome! Bart "I'm not worthy" Brown

On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 20:22:03 +0100, Magnus Svensson <[email hidden]> wrote: >I think we can say, backed up with statistics for the last 20 years, >that NASCAR/CART/Indy/IRL doesn't compare that favourably with F1 with >regards to safety. I personally think it is because of the nature of >oval racing to a large degree. OK, you've seen mine (elsewhere in this thread), let's see yours. Let's see those statistics. "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

> Restrictor plate racing killed Dale Earnhardt. Dale killed Dale by not racing and trying to block the field.

That is a pretty lame excuse. Miles per Death record? Or Miles for Injury? I guess drag racing is the most dangerous. The MPD must be damn high since they only do a 1/4 mile at a time. Lee Buchanan wrote: > > You fail to note how many more miles NASCAR drivers run--in Winston Cup > alone, let alone the other series. There are many, many more opportunities > for crashes and injuries. -- Solo1 C-Modified (CASC-OR/BARC) http://www.barc-oc.com http://www.casc.on.ca

You didn't answer ymenard's question. "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:vCIk6.847$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> No dead drivers in F1 since 1994. 1982 before that. > > Four dead in NASCAR in the past season + one race this year. > > NASCAR is a badly run auto racing series. F1 is light years ahead of it. > > David G Fisher > > > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:suIk6.14267$[email hidden]... > > >"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > > > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO

excuse > > for > > > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > > > > > Uh LOL sure David everybody is entitled to his opinion, whateverrationale > > it is.. ;) > > > > Did you scream that babbling in 1994 when Senna and Ratzenberger bothdied

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > the same weekend, when Wendlinger got a severe crash at Monaco, when > > Barrichello had a death-defying crash from the lack of safety in Imola's > > track configuration, etc..? > > > > Racing is dangerous. People have, are and will continue to be killed or > > severely injured. Deal with it, or stop watching it. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > > -- May the Downforce be with you... > > -- http://www.ymenard.com/ > > -- People think it must be fun to be a genius, but they don't realise

how > > hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world. > > > > > > >

Let's shut down the breweries. "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:RYIk6.1130$[email hidden]... > Fine. I'll retract my call for it to be shut down. > > From now on I'll just continue to call it a crap form of auto racing that > has far more in common with the WWF than anything else. > > 49 year old drivers? Artificial close racing? Dead bodies? Beer, beer,and

Quoted text (10 lines)

> more beer. > > David G Fisher > > > "Philip D'Amato" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:CWIk6.2175$[email hidden]... > > Don't watch or participate in things you find to be upsetting or that > > otherwise go against your ethical grain. Don't force your opinions on > > others that aren't receptive. Much of your reasoning is flawed - you

draw > > conclusions that are not backed up by your stated opinions masqueradingas > > facts. The bottom line is that, as in everything, humans areindividuals > > and by definition make their own choices. To put it crassly, who thehell

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > do you think you are? If Dale wanted to run with an open faced helmet, > then > > by all means, let him. It was his life to lose, not yours. Since your > such > > a big F1 fan and safety expert, then please why don't you call up Bernie > and > > tell him how he could've prevented that corner workers death last

season?

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > Get a grip. > > > > -- > > Philip D'Amato > > [email hidden] > > 00 ZX-6R > > 00 S4 > > > > > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:DPHk6.464$[email hidden]... > > > > <snip> > > > > >

>"Barton Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote > Man, I gotta hand it to you: this is the single most incredible piece of > flamebait I've seen in this forum in five or so years of dropping in > here -- true Troll-Hall-of-Fame-quality nonsense. I award you the > Fran�ois Menard Memorial Golden Turd with dingleberry clusters and > undigested peanuts. Bravo! U R awesome! Ouch. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- People think it must be fun to be a genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

Get a clue before you post, not worth reading your post. "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:DPHk6.464$[email hidden]... > I find it really ridiculous that people are acting as if the death of a > NASCAR driver is a tragedy. > > You knew it was going to happen, and so did I. It happens almost everyyear. > Three times last year alone. When you support an activity that you knowwill > result in the death of someone, then it's not a tragedy. It's simply > disgusting. > > I keep hearing the phrase, "Death is a part of auto racing, and these > drivers understand that but want to do it anyway." Bullshit. It isn't apart > of all types of auto racing. Just NASCAR. Formula 1 hasn't had a driverdie

Quoted text (7 lines)

> since 1994. Before that it was 1982. NASCAR is about beer and crashes. > Safety is a science in F1, and their record proves it. They have the top > experts in the world in charge of the safety of it's drivers. NASCAR is a > joke and the modern equivalent of the galdiator races. > > If you support NASCAR, then you support the INEVITABLE death of it's > drivers. How the hell are you then sad when one dies? Turns my stomach

when > I read or see the melodramatic tributes to a fan favorite. I LOVE F1, butif > the drivers were dying I'd say close it down right now. I have said onthis > newsgroup before that I didn't think the F1 drivers of the '60's asmodeled > in GPL were brave, heroic or "real" drivers because they raced knowingdeath > was a real possibility. I think they were simply foolish people who didn't > value their lives very much. > > There is NO reason why drivers have to die in NASCAR. It's simply a POORLY > run, bush league type of auto racing with fans that apparently don't TRULY > care about the safety of it's drivers. It's an embarrassment. Driversstill > have the choice of wearing open-faced helmets? Drivers have the choice to > wear a neck brace that obviously could have saved the lives of previousdead > drivers? > > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excusefor > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > Shut it down or just count the races until the next dead driver is pulled > from his car. Then the people who are in charge of NASCAR, and it's fanscan

Quoted text (11 lines)

> once again pay tribute to them. > > Pathetic. > > David G Fisher > > > > > >

<Snap: David G Fisher wrote that NASCAR should close down because of the recent lethal accidents> David, You should realise that motorsports is a dangerous business. Whatever you do in the name of safety, from introducing seatbelts to emasculating circuits, there will always be a certain risk. There will always be deaths. Even in the two most safety-concious racing series; CART and F1, 5 drivers have been killed in recent history (Ratzenberger, Senna, Krosnoff, G. Rodriguez and Moore) and besides them several marshalls and spectators. I believe we have done almost anything we can do to provide maximum safety; I think we cannot anticipate to the kind of accident that proves lethal today. We can only learn from them and prevent them from happening again. I have sympathy with anyone who is shattered by the death of Dale Earnhardt. But they should all realise that death is a terrible but inevitable part of motorsport and that Dale accepted the risk. Eventually, we have to move on, but for now don't deny your saddnes. and remember that Dale's death might safe lives of other drivers in similar crashes. grtngs, hgrm

LOL! -- Scott B. Husted "PA-Scott" ICQ# 4395450 "Barton Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Man, I gotta hand it to you: this is the single most incredible piece of > flamebait I've seen in this forum in five or so years of dropping in > here -- true Troll-Hall-of-Fame-quality nonsense. I award you the > Fran�ois Menard Memorial Golden Turd with dingleberry clusters and > undigested peanuts. Bravo! U R awesome! > > Bart "I'm not worthy" Brown

Yupper, we got 100s :o) "Mark Seery" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:LkVk6.5513$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (30 lines)

| If we can have one of those burning oil drums as well, I'm on my way ;-) | | MS | | Thom j. <[email hidden]> wrote in message | news:gxOk6.2052$[email hidden]... | > Now Now Jan, We all don't drink beer here in the US you know!! We do | > have cheap "Thunderbird Wine" too! It's even better in a brown paper bag | > and especially while we're all hanging on street corners gettin` | > drunk...haha | > Cheers Thom_j. | > | > "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message | > news:[email hidden]... | > | Hey... that's not so bad. If the beer were any good, that is. <g> | > | | > | Jan. | > | =--- | > | Don Chapman wrote... | > | > <snip> | > | > Yep, stupid American general public, we have nothing to watch | > | > but Nascar and nothing to drink but beer. | > | > | > | > | > | | > | | > | > | |

In article <RYIk6.1130$[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> writes: > >49 year old drivers? Artificial close racing? Dead bodies? Beer, beer, and >more beer. A.J. Foyt, Mario Andretti, and probably others raced Indycars well into their 50's. Do you have the same feelings about them? Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL F1 hcp. +28.67...F2 +151.26...F3 hcp. +373.73 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <xfMk6.122587$[email hidden]>, "Don Chapman" <[email hidden]> writes: >Let's shut down the Indianapolis 500 as >well!!(2 deaths in the 90's). 2?!? Scott Brayton and who? Jovy Marcello was in 1987, I think. I can't think of anyone else right now... Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL F1 hcp. +28.67...F2 +151.26...F3 hcp. +373.73 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <DPHk6.464$[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> writes: >Shut it down or just count the races until the next dead driver is pulled >from his car. Then the people who are in charge of NASCAR, and it's fans can >once again pay tribute to them. > I'm amazed that you actually seem to *believe* that rant... Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL F1 hcp. +28.67...F2 +151.26...F3 hcp. +373.73 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

> A.J. Foyt, Mario Andretti, and probably others raced Indycars well intotheir > 50's. Do you have the same feelings about them? >Paul Newman was in this year's Daytona 24hours and he's into his 70's, my dad says you need less sleep as you get older.

What the hell does mileage have to do with anything? NASCAR drivers rarely use something called a brake pedal, so they will accumulate a lot of mileage. David G Fisher "Jeff Vincent" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (45 lines)

> On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 05:46:03 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >No dead drivers in F1 since 1994. 1982 before that. > > > >Four dead in NASCAR in the past season + one race this year. > > > >NASCAR is a badly run auto racing series. F1 is light years ahead of it. > > It's hard to compare apples to oranges. But better that than > apples and fruitcakes... > > One thing to consider is the man-mileage accumulated. The 2000 F1 > season consisted of 3214 miles. With 22 drivers, the season consisted > of about 70,700 man-miles (actually less, due to drivers dropping out > of races, but this assumption actually favors more accumulated milage > in F1 than NASCAR). > > The 2000 NASCAR Winston Cup season was about 13,500 miles. With 43 > drivers, the season consisted of 580,000 man-miles, or about 8.2 times > the length of the F1 season. Also, since you want include BGN and CTS > deaths to pad your argument, we've got to include the mileage as well. > Let's pick arbitrary numbers of 8100 miles (60% distance) times 38 > drivers for ~308,000 BGN man-miles, 6750 miles (50% distance) times 32 > drivers for ~216,000 CTS man-miles. > > So for 2000, we have F1 running 70,700 man-miles with no driver > fatalities (but one racing official fatality). We have NASCAR > WC/BGN/CTS running 1,104,000 man-miles with four fatalities (I'm > giving you this year's Daytona as a freebie) or one fatality per > 276,000 man-miles. > > If you extrapolate F1's man-mileage numbers back to 1994 (seven > years, 1994-2000), you get two driver fatalities over 495,000 > man-miles, or one fatality per 248,000 man-miles. > > So, David, one more time, which series is it that "safety is a > science" and which series "is a joke and the modern equivalent of the > galdiator races"? Sorry, but from the numbers I'm having trouble > making the crystal-clear distinction that you seem to be able to > divine. > > "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was > nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into > a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

"David G Fisher" > > having Sex...shall we ban that as unsafe? > > If thousands of people get together to start watching people die while in > the middle of having sex, then yes, I'd probably be strongly in favor ofan > event like that being shut down. > > David G Fisher Thats a good point. But lets do a little game called 'what if' what if there was no TV coverage of Nascar what if there were not millions to be made what if racing for folks like Dale Earnhardt was just like the thousands of club and semi-pro racers around the country. Would Dale and others like him still race? The fact that we are voyeurs of death and mayhem does not say well for ourselves....but I really doubt that a racer like Earnhardt or Kenny Schrader would be happy selling cars or partaking in any other career. If you asked most amateur and professional drivers would they still race without the big money and fame, I'm thinking they would pretty much vote to keep racing. So whether we watch or not is irrelevant. dave henrie ps...hope you have time to answer all these posts...:)

> If you haven't figured it out yet, autoracing is dangerous no matter what > form of it you enjoy or watch. No, just badly organized auto racing is dangerous. 4 driver deaths in nine months in NASCAR. No driver deaths since 1994 in F1. Yes, we know how much you don't like F1. "If Michael Schumacher were my brother...I would ask him what it's like to drive in an open wheel "parade". Scott Husted Sorry Scott, but Michael Schumacher is the best driver in the world. Likely the best driver in auto racing history. NASCAR drivers can only dream of having his ability. Actually, that's asking too much of them. Michael feels the same way about safety in auto racing as I do. Great minds think alike. David G Fisher "NASCAR is farmers driving around in circles. " Eddie Irvine "Scott B. Husted" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ifRk6.2284$[email hidden]... > Yeah.. F1 is the most advanced, high tech, orchestrated elitist paradein

Quoted text (39 lines)

> auto racing. > > If you haven't figured it out yet, autoracing is dangerous no matter what > form of it you enjoy or watch. > > -- > Scott B. Husted > PA-Scott > The Pits: PowerSims Magazine (http://www.theuspits.com) > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:vCIk6.847$[email hidden]... > > No dead drivers in F1 since 1994. 1982 before that. > > > > Four dead in NASCAR in the past season + one race this year. > > > > NASCAR is a badly run auto racing series. F1 is light years ahead of it. > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:suIk6.14267$[email hidden]... > > > >"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > > > > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO > excuse > > > for > > > > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > > > > > > > > Uh LOL sure David everybody is entitled to his opinion, whatever > rationale > > > it is.. ;) > > > > > > Did you scream that babbling in 1994 when Senna and Ratzenberger both > died > > > the same weekend, when Wendlinger got a severe crash at Monaco, when > > > Barrichello had a death-defying crash from the lack of safety in

Imola's > > > track configuration, etc..? > > > > > > Racing is dangerous. People have, are and will continue to be killedor

Quoted text (18 lines)

> > > severely injured. Deal with it, or stop watching it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > > > -- May the Downforce be with you... > > > -- http://www.ymenard.com/ > > > -- People think it must be fun to be a genius, but they don't realise > how > > > hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world. > > > > > > > > > > > > >

If they could still support themselves financially, then yes, I'm sure most of them would continue to race in some form. As long as they don't hurt anyone else, then therey are free to do so. Everyday NASCAR asks the public to support it and become a fan. My original post is simply me finally replying to NASCAR and it's supporters. NASCAR is a poorly run form of auto racing. Four deaths in nine months. That deserves to be criticized. If it was F1, the NFL, NBA, or any other professional sport, I'd say the same thing. And no, I don't have the time to reply to all of the posts in this thread although I'll try my best. :-( David G Fisher "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:OFXk6.453868$[email hidden]... > > "David G Fisher" > > > having Sex...shall we ban that as unsafe? > > > > If thousands of people get together to start watching people die whilein

Quoted text (23 lines)

> > the middle of having sex, then yes, I'd probably be strongly in favor of > an > > event like that being shut down. > > > > David G Fisher > Thats a good point. But lets do a little game called 'what if' > what if there was no TV coverage of Nascar > what if there were not millions to be made > what if racing for folks like Dale Earnhardt was just > like the thousands of club and semi-pro racers around > the country. Would Dale and others like him still race? > The fact that we are voyeurs of death and mayhem does not > say well for ourselves....but I really doubt that a racer > like Earnhardt or Kenny Schrader would be happy > selling cars or partaking in any other career. > If you asked most amateur and professional drivers > would they still race without the big money and fame, > I'm thinking they would pretty much vote to keep > racing. So whether we watch or not is irrelevant. > dave henrie > ps...hope you have time to answer all these posts...:) > >

David G Fisher wrote: > And no, I don't have the time to reply to all of the posts in this thread How very convenient for you.

"Txl" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:nCLk6.2370$[email hidden]... > nascar is to the american public what the circus used to be for the > romans.... Definitely. > The organizers/rulers of nascar get the money, as much money or more than > the leading drivers, without taking a risk. > But you can't say ANYTHING negative about the US here because it is justnot > accpeted, it i part of american TRADITION (ha ha ha). Luckily it's only traditon for some, and not the majority. NASCAR is basically considered in the same category as the WWF by most people in this country. I was glad to see the F1 event at Indianapolis was such a success. There is a sports radio station in Philadelphia that is one of the most listened to in the country, and no one ever mentions NASCAR. The NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, college basketball, colege football, just about anything BUT NASCAR is discussed by the hosts and the callers. David G Fisher

If you are going to quote me, how about at least quoting the whole sentence? I actually said, "And no, I don't have the time to reply to all of the posts in this thread although I'll try my best. :-( " David G Fisher "Gerry Aitken" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > David G Fisher wrote: > > > And no, I don't have the time to reply to all of the posts in thisthread > > How very convenient for you.

REAL MEN DRIVE RALLY REAL CARS - REAL ROADS - REAL SKILL Han Monsees <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:971adr$nih$[email hidden]... > <Snap: David G Fisher wrote that NASCAR should close down because of the > recent lethal accidents> > > David, > > You should realise that motorsports is a dangerous business. Whatever youdo > in the name of safety, from introducing seatbelts to emasculatingcircuits,

Quoted text (7 lines)

> there will always be a certain risk. There will always be deaths. > > Even in the two most safety-concious racing series; CART and F1, 5 drivers > have been killed in recent history (Ratzenberger, Senna, Krosnoff, G. > Rodriguez and Moore) and besides them several marshalls and spectators. > > I believe we have done almost anything we can do to provide maximum

safety; > I think we cannot anticipate to the kind of accident that proves lethal > today. We can only learn from them and prevent them from happening again. > > I have sympathy with anyone who is shattered by the death of DaleEarnhardt. > But they should all realise that death is a terrible but inevitable partof

Quoted text (10 lines)

> motorsport and that Dale accepted the risk. > > Eventually, we have to move on, but for now don't deny your saddnes. and > remember that Dale's death might safe lives of other drivers in similar > crashes. > > grtngs, > hgrm > >

Sorry about that. Looks like I didn't read your post very carefully. I thought you were claiming Nascar had a better safety record than F1, when you were just pointing out a factual error in DF's post. Your comment was reasonable. "Peter Holt" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > No, it's not. Fisher implied that there had been no deaths in F1 > since since '94. That's not true. Simple as that.

Sorry, for some reason I thought Marcello was 1992. Brayton was 1996. EldredP <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > In article <xfMk6.122587$[email hidden]>, "DonChapman"

Quoted text (15 lines)

> <[email hidden]> writes: > > >Let's shut down the Indianapolis 500 as > >well!!(2 deaths in the 90's). > > 2?!? Scott Brayton and who? Jovy Marcello was in 1987, I think. I can't > think of anyone else right now... > > Eldred > -- > Dale Earnhardt, Sr. 1951-2001 > Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > GPL F1 hcp. +28.67...F2 +151.26...F3 hcp. +373.73 > > Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats

you > with experience... > Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Yep, if its legal it must be moral!! Txl <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:TrSk6.2516$[email hidden]... > at least in amsterdam they don't hide the prostitutes or the joints inbrown > paper bag, you picked JUST the perfect WRONG example, Holland legalizedthe > "pot-smoking" long ago because people were doing it anyway, no pointhiding

Quoted text (13 lines)

> things everybody does... > > > "Don Chapman" <[email hidden]> a �crit dans le message news: > ffPk6.122776$[email hidden]... > > Wow, I never realized until Txl pointed it out that the US was the only > > country that has immorality and hypocrisy. Thanks for the tip man. On my > way > > to Amsterdam now! > > > > Txl <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:sMOk6.2431$[email hidden]... > > > well, the sotry of the brown paper bag is typical of the american way

of > > > thinking, it's okay to get drunk on the street as long as you hide itin

Quoted text (41 lines)

> a > > > paper bag, even if everybody knows what's in the paperbag. > > > It's okay to fuck your secretary if you go to church on the sunday > morning > > > with your loving wife and kids > > > > > > > > > > > > "Thom j." <[email hidden]> a �crit dans le message news: > > > gxOk6.2052$[email hidden]... > > > > Now Now Jan, We all don't drink beer here in the US you know!! We do > > > > have cheap "Thunderbird Wine" too! It's even better in a brown paper > bag > > > > and especially while we're all hanging on street corners gettin` > > > > drunk...haha > > > > Cheers Thom_j. > > > > > > > > "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in > message > > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > | Hey... that's not so bad. If the beer were any good, that is. <g> > > > > | > > > > | Jan. > > > > | =--- > > > > | Don Chapman wrote... > > > > | > <snip> > > > > | > Yep, stupid American general public, we have nothing to watch > > > > | > but Nascar and nothing to drink but beer. > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Gee David are you near Philly? If so please tell me & do you wanna buy a house since your local? Yikes..lol Sorry I couldn't resist... The Devil made me do it! Cheers Thom_j. "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:laYk6.2507$[email hidden]... <snipped> | There is a sports radio station in Philadelphia that is one of the most | listened to in the country, and no one ever mentions NASCAR. The NFL, NBA, | MLB, NHL, college basketball, colege football, just about anything BUT | NASCAR is discussed by the hosts and the callers. | David G Fisher

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> .

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > There is a sports radio station in Philadelphia that is one of the most > listened to in the country, and no one ever mentions NASCAR. The NFL, NBA, > MLB, NHL, college basketball, colege football, just about anything BUT > NASCAR is discussed by the hosts and the callers. > > David G Fisher

If anything can be ludicrous about this past week, the so-called sports radio hosts have been. They have been flailing about like beached whales as they try and understand restrictor plates and Hans devices. Wanna hear a guy drowing? Just listen to any sports radio show this week, the hosts are sinking in their lack of knowledge about just what racing and Nascar racing in paticular is. Now back on-topic....you basic premise is that F1 is far superior because they have had no deaths since Senna. Thats true, but it took Senna's death, and Roland Ratzenberger's and one near fatality (Karl Wendlinger?)at Monoco to prod the FIA into action. 2 1/2 deaths is close enough to 4 deaths to equal out. Any death is too much. The FIA already had their wakeup call. Now Nascar has their own.. This does not make one series superior to the other. And the results since Senna's death, while safer, have been a giant reduction in racing. F1 these days is more like a hotlap competiton. Bring back the days of Mansel and Senna, or Lauda and Prost. Give us some RACING, that is what is lacking from F1 these days. And from CART for that matter as well. In the past four years, the best door to door racing I have seen has been not Nascar, or F1 or Cart or Sportscars, but touring car events. What is it about the circuts and cars that promote such close racing? F1 needs to find that magic...so does CART. dave henrie

>Jovy Marcello was in 1987, I think. I think it may have been 1992? :-( -- Cheers! Graeme Nash

>No driver deaths since 1994 in F1. In the Early part of the '94 season then, DGF, I take it you were campaigning for F1 to be shut down? -- Cheers! Graeme Nash

Lame, Dude Gerry Aitken <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > David G Fisher wrote: > > > And no, I don't have the time to reply to all of the posts in thisthread > > How very convenient for you.

Sorry about that. Looks like I didn't read your post very carefully. I thought you were claiming Nascar had a better safety record than F1, when you were just pointing out a factual error in DF's post. Your comment was reasonable. "Peter Holt" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > No, it's not. Fisher implied that there had been no deaths in F1 > since since '94. That's not true. Simple as that.

"L_NiN0" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:2kYk6.154188$[email hidden]... > REAL MEN DRIVE RALLY > > REAL CARS - REAL ROADS - REAL SKILL I'll agree with all that except the real cars part. The cars run the premier Rally events are shells, everthing below the surface is not even close to whats on the 'real' cars. case in point: Find out how long in minutes and how many steps it takes to start Richard Burn's Subaru.... As for the rest...the top drivers are truly SOME of the best racers around. dave henrie

Hey Dave, your getting dissed pretty good at : news.simracing.org General Discussion Husted reposted your post from here and titled it Ignorance in the community, Bring your flame suit !

>There is a sports radio station in Philadelphia that is one of the most >listened to in the country, and no one ever mentions NASCAR. Ever think LOCATION might have something to do with it, oh godly one? The US is the fourth largest nation in terms of land mass. Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

>mayeb you are right, proobably you are right, but do you thing the death of >earnhardt will change things in nascar the way senna's death changed them in >F1 ? Maybe not at the pace that Senna's did (for instance, the US won't arrest ISC officials), but it will happen now. The media outcry will be too great. Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

>What the hell does mileage have to do with anything? NASCAR drivers rarely >use something called a brake pedal, so they will accumulate a lot of >mileage. Considering that they're such awful drivers, how come they all don't perish in wrecks at Sears Point, Portland, or Wakins Glen? And I'm truly sure they don't use the brakes at Martinsville or Pocono. Yet another compelling argument.... - Alan Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

>That is a pretty lame excuse. Miles per Death record? Or Miles for >Injury? >I guess drag racing is the most dangerous. The MPD must be damn high >since they only do a 1/4 mile at a time. I don't remember F1 cars being able to accelerate from a dead stop to 400 kph in 2 seconds either. Logic would dicate that it would be the most dangerous of all motor sports. - Alan Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

>Sorry Scott, but Michael Schumacher is the best driver in the world. Likely >the best driver in auto racing history. NASCAR drivers can only dream of >having his ability. Actually, that's asking too much of them. > So why did Earnhardt's team place so well at the 24 Hours of Daytona? Or are all the drivers in that event crappy too? Last I checked, comparing the two if kinda difficult, considering that one drives stocks whilst the other drives open-wheel. >Michael feels the same way about safety in auto racing as I do. Great minds >think alike. > I'm sure Michael feels blessed to be in your company. -wonders why no one has made the Jean Alesi "anyone can drive these cars now, they're too controlled" argument yet- Alan Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

"Don Chapman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:xfMk6.122587$[email hidden]... > David, > > I find it unbelieveable that a fan of auto racing would have an opinionlike > this. I am a fan of all motorsports and unfortunately they are all > dangerous. Death is a possibilty in ALL motorsports. For the umpteenth time, there have been four driver deaths in NASCAR in the past nine months. No driver deaths in F1 since 1994. It's a badly run sport because these deaths could have been prevented ( the HANS device certainly would helped). >You have > obviously not been a fan of Forumla One for very long to make such > unintelligent statements like this, > > "I LOVE F1, but if the drivers were dying I'd say close it down rightnow." > > You think 1994 was a banner year for Formula 1? There was even a lawsuiton > that! You don't think that the FIA, FOCA, and the track owners made knee > jerk reactions after the death of Senna? Yes, they made changes but it was > AFTER the tragedy. The past 9 months have been very bad for Nascar.However, > do you know how many Winston Cup Nascar drivers had died before the year > 2000? How can you discount the past nine months? F1 evolved after the death of Senna (no deaths since), if it hadn't and drivers continued to die due to poor management, then I'd criticize it the same way I've criticized NASCAR. NASCAR does not evolve. It just continues to deny that anything can be done to make it safer. The past nine months prove that. It's a badly run sport if for no other reason then their continued failure to make a device such as the HANS mandatory. > To say that the F1 drivers of the sixties were not brave, heroic, or"real" > drivers because "they raced knowing death was a real possibility" is just > ludicrous!!! According to you, all race drivers from the past who helpedto > build this sport to what it is today "were simply foolish people whodidn't > value their lives very much." What kind of crap is this?!?!? I used to race a motocross bike. 100mph on unfamiliar terrain, with trees 10 feet to either side of me. No rollcage. I guess my skin was my rollcage. Launched myself high in the air, etc. People used to tell me how brave I was to do that. I told them there was no bravery involved at all. I was simply having foolish fun. Bravery is forcing yourself to do something for the greater good, even when you're afraid to do so. I wanted to ride the cycle. Race car drivers want to race. They aren't forced to. I realized what I was doing was foolish because IMO, all a person is doing when they die while "playing" is avoiding a lifetime of responsibilities, and giving up the opportunity to counter all the bad there is in this world with their own good. > Straight from Atlas F1(www.atlasf1.com), here is the list of driverskilled > in Formula One since 1950: > > "Among drivers who participated seriously in Formula One since the modern > championship began in 1950, the list of those killed in racing cars looks > something like this: <snip long list> The point is, there have been none since 1994. F1 changed. NASCAR hasn't and won't. More drivers will die soon. Bet on it. Could a F1 driver die soon too? Absolutely. I doubt though that four will die in the space of nine months, and still no significant changes will be made. > To stereotype Nascar as all "about beer and crashes" is to show your lackof > knowledge of motorsport in general. That's funny. A NASCAR fan is on Jeopardy right now, and the comment she made was, "We don't all go to see the crashes." That she even felt compelled to say that....... > I sincerely hope that Nascar gets its act > togther and makes some serious changes, but your arguements andaccusations > are just plain wrong. So I'm wrong for saying NASCAR is poorly run motor sport for not making changes in the past, but then you say it needs to get it's act together and make changes now?

Quoted text (7 lines)

> I do not know what the answer is for you, but I > honestly feel you owe this group an apology if you want to maintain any > respect here. You are entitled to your opinion, true, but I am trying to > give you the benefit of the doubt. If this is in fact your honest opinion, > then I will use your own words to sum it up, "Pathetic". > > Don Chapman

I have news for you Don, most sensible people outside of the NASCAR fans feel the same way I do. Every person I've spoken to thinks NASCAR is a joke right now. I live in the fourth largest market in the U.S. One of the most listened to sports talk radio stations in the country is here (never discusses NASCAR though, wonder why?). Since Earnhardt's death, I've been listening to NASCAR fans call in and desperately trying to convince the hosts and the public that their sport isn't badly run and basically the WWF on wheels. They failed miserably. I am in the vast majority with my opinions on this subject. Maybe not on a newsgroup with NASCAR sim fans, but definitely within the general public. Others in this thread agree with me as well. The last thing I'll do is apologize for criticizing a sport which has had four deaths in nine months. David G Fisher

Quoted text (20 lines)

> David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:DPHk6.464$[email hidden]... > > I find it really ridiculous that people are acting as if the death of a > > NASCAR driver is a tragedy. > > > > You knew it was going to happen, and so did I. It happens almost every > year. > > Three times last year alone. When you support an activity that you know > will > > result in the death of someone, then it's not a tragedy. It's simply > > disgusting. > > > > I keep hearing the phrase, "Death is a part of auto racing, and these > > drivers understand that but want to do it anyway." Bullshit. It isn't a > part > > of all types of auto racing. Just NASCAR. Formula 1 hasn't had a driver > die > > since 1994. Before that it was 1982. NASCAR is about beer and crashes. > > Safety is a science in F1, and their record proves it. They have the top > > experts in the world in charge of the safety of it's drivers. NASCAR is

a > > joke and the modern equivalent of the galdiator races. > > > > If you support NASCAR, then you support the INEVITABLE death of it's > > drivers. How the hell are you then sad when one dies? Turns my stomach > when > > I read or see the melodramatic tributes to a fan favorite. I LOVE F1,but

Quoted text (8 lines)

> if > > the drivers were dying I'd say close it down right now. I have said on > this > > newsgroup before that I didn't think the F1 drivers of the '60's as > modeled > > in GPL were brave, heroic or "real" drivers because they raced knowing > death > > was a real possibility. I think they were simply foolish people who

didn't > > value their lives very much. > > > > There is NO reason why drivers have to die in NASCAR. It's simply aPOORLY > > run, bush league type of auto racing with fans that apparently don'tTRULY > > care about the safety of it's drivers. It's an embarrassment. Drivers > still > > have the choice of wearing open-faced helmets? Drivers have the choiceto

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > wear a neck brace that obviously could have saved the lives of previous > dead > > drivers? > > > > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excuse > for > > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > > > Shut it down or just count the races until the next dead driver is

pulled

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > from his car. Then the people who are in charge of NASCAR, and it's fans > can > > once again pay tribute to them. > > > > Pathetic. > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

I said there were no driver deaths since 1994. No errors there. David G Fisher "Simon Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:gpYk6.53$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> Sorry about that. Looks like I didn't read your post very carefully. I > thought you were claiming Nascar had a better safety record than F1, when > you were just pointing out a factual error in DF's post. Your comment was > reasonable. > > "Peter Holt" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > No, it's not. Fisher implied that there had been no deaths in F1 > > since since '94. That's not true. Simple as that. > > >

>2?!? Scott Brayton and who? Jovy Marcello was in 1987, I think. I can't >think of anyone else right now... > Wasn't it the Vulkovich grandson? There were also two other accidents that resulted in life-threatening injuries (Stan Fox and Alessandro Zampedri (sp?)). Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

That would be a good thing. :-) From what I've heard over the past few days, NASCAR fans are flaming everyone who thinks four deaths in nine months is a sign of ineptitude. David G Fisher "John" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:971mak$rf2$[email hidden]... > Hey Dave, your getting dissed pretty good at : news.simracing.org > General Discussion Husted reposted your post from here and > titled it Ignorance in the community, Bring your flame suit ! > >

> Give us some >RACING, that is what is lacking from F1 these days. And from CART for that >matter as well. Why? Have you missed the last three Michigan 500s or something? :) - Alan Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

>"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > No, just badly organized auto racing is dangerous. 4 driver deaths in nine > months in NASCAR. No, auto racing is dangerous. POINT. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- People think it must be fun to be a genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

Jcharm wrote: > > Lame, Dude Not really. Go on, think about it...or at least try ;).

David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3LXk6.2492$[email hidden]... > > Sorry Scott, but Michael Schumacher is the best driver in the world Reckon the rally drivers might have something to say about that.... > > Michael feels the same way about safety in auto racing as I do. Greatminds > think alike. LOL!!!

David G Fisher wrote: > For the umpteenth time, there have been four driver deaths in NASCAR inthe > past nine months. No driver deaths in F1 since 1994. Lets do some math: F1: 16 [17] races each season with 20 [22] drivers in each race... = 374 "drivers" start a race thruout a season... (based on 17 races a season) NASCAR: 39 races each season with an average of 40 drivers in each race... = 1560 "drivers" start a race thruout a season.... Over four times as many drivers start a NASCAR race compared to F1 each season... so for every NASCAR season you can count 4 years of F1. ed_

Actually this brings up a good issue. You appear to be comparing the mortality rate of Winston Cup, Busch, and Craftsman Truck racing to F1 alone. When you take into consideration the participation rate of NASCAR events versus F1 events is there really that much difference in the mortality rates? We'll need a math/stats pro to help us with this one. BD On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 05:46:03 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (40 lines)

>No dead drivers in F1 since 1994. 1982 before that. > >Four dead in NASCAR in the past season + one race this year. > >NASCAR is a badly run auto racing series. F1 is light years ahead of it. > >David G Fisher > > >"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:suIk6.14267$[email hidden]... >> >"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote >> > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excuse >> for >> > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. >> >> >> Uh LOL sure David everybody is entitled to his opinion, whatever rationale >> it is.. ;) >> >> Did you scream that babbling in 1994 when Senna and Ratzenberger both died >> the same weekend, when Wendlinger got a severe crash at Monaco, when >> Barrichello had a death-defying crash from the lack of safety in Imola's >> track configuration, etc..? >> >> Racing is dangerous. People have, are and will continue to be killed or >> severely injured. Deal with it, or stop watching it. >> >> >> >> >> -- >> -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> >> -- May the Downforce be with you... >> -- http://www.ymenard.com/ >> -- People think it must be fun to be a genius, but they don't realise how >> hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world. >> >> >>

Just didn't want you to be without the knowledge that Scott Husted is getting you cooked over their hate to see anyone get blindsided behind their back :)

> F1 changed. NASCAR hasn't and >won't. How do you know this? Are you god, by chance? >I doubt though that four will die in the space of nine >months, and still no significant changes will be made. Again, you're combining multiple series. >That's funny. A NASCAR fan is on Jeopardy right now, and the comment she >made was, "We don't all go to see the crashes." That she even felt compelled >to say that....... Everyone in this country thinks the same thing about all motorsport. If you believe otherwise, you're an idiot. I had a friend once tell me that I should watch F1, because, and I quote, "The crashes are better." >So I'm wrong for saying NASCAR is poorly run motor sport for not making >changes in the past, but then you say it needs to get it's act together and >make changes now? Of course it needs changes. I believe that. The drivers believe that. But F1 is not bulletproof either. That, and you show a disdain for Earnhardt that screams "troll". After all, where were you when Irwin or Roper died? >Every person I've spoken to thinks NASCAR is a joke >right now. Who do you talk to? If I ask cello players if speed metal is "good" music, what are the chances I'll get the answer of "yes"? >I live in the fourth largest market in the U.S. Surprise surprise! Philadelphia DOES NOT represent all of America's interests! >One of the most >listened to sports talk radio stations in the country is here Again, because of your market. >(never >discusses NASCAR though, wonder why?) Dunno. WFAN In NYC, the most listened to of all sports stations in the country, discusses NASCAR. Maybe you aren't meeting all the interests of those listening. >I've been >listening to NASCAR fans call in and desperately trying to convince the >hosts and the public that their sport isn't badly run and basically the WWF >on wheels. I believe there's a word for that. Its called "bias". >I am in the vast majority with my opinions >on this subject. Maybe not on a newsgroup with NASCAR sim fans, but >definitely within the general public. The general public doesn't know truth from hype. That's why they all still think Mike Tyson is the best boxer in the world. The fact that its people like you telling them what to believe doesn't help. And when will you learn that the US has citizens outside the boundaries of Eastern PA? >The last thing I'll do is apologize for criticizing a sport which has >had four deaths in nine months. The SI almanac lists NASCAR under the general heading of Motorsports, along with F1, CART, IRL, etc. Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

Thanks. :-) I can't find that thread anywhere though. It says something about Scott that he feels the need to take a post from this newsgroup to another forum to generate criticism. I even stated when I started this thread that I had not replied to any of the threads at this newsgroup (or anywhere else actually) concerning the death of Earnhardt. David G Fisher "John" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:971pj0$sn0$[email hidden]... > Just didn't want you to be without the knowledge that Scott Husted > is getting you cooked over their hate to see anyone get blindsided behind > their back :) > >

Then you and Ted Kaczynski should have wonderful conversations. -- Scott B. Husted "PA-Scott" ICQ# 4395450 "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3LXk6.2492$[email hidden]... >Great minds think alike. > > David G Fisher > "NASCAR is farmers driving around in circles. " Eddie Irvine

BTW.. it has little to do with whether or not I prefer F1 vs NASCAR. I love Touring Cars and Trans-Am... that doesn't make it justifiable in an attempt to compare them to NASCAR. Let me know the next time you see 3 or more F1 cars going "door to door" for lap after lap. Hell, let me know the next time the race finishes where the second place driver can actually see the winner as he takes the checkered flag. -- Scott B. Husted "PA-Scott" ICQ# 4395450 "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3LXk6.2492$[email hidden]... > > If you haven't figured it out yet, autoracing is dangerous no matter what > > form of it you enjoy or watch. > > No, just badly organized auto racing is dangerous. 4 driver deaths in nine > months in NASCAR. > > No driver deaths since 1994 in F1. > > Yes, we know how much you don't like F1. > > "If Michael Schumacher were my brother...I would ask him what it's like to > drive in an open wheel "parade". Scott Husted > > Sorry Scott, but Michael Schumacher is the best driver in the world. Likely > the best driver in auto racing history. NASCAR drivers can only dream of > having his ability. Actually, that's asking too much of them. > > Michael feels the same way about safety in auto racing as I do. Great minds > think alike. > > David G Fisher > "NASCAR is farmers driving around in circles. " Eddie Irvine > > > "Scott B. Husted" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:ifRk6.2284$[email hidden]... > > Yeah.. F1 is the most advanced, high tech, orchestrated elitist parade > in > > auto racing. > > > > If you haven't figured it out yet, autoracing is dangerous no matter what > > form of it you enjoy or watch. > > > > -- > > Scott B. Husted > > PA-Scott > > The Pits: PowerSims Magazine (http://www.theuspits.com) > > > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:vCIk6.847$[email hidden]... > > > No dead drivers in F1 since 1994. 1982 before that. > > > > > > Four dead in NASCAR in the past season + one race this year. > > > > > > NASCAR is a badly run auto racing series. F1 is light years ahead of it. > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > > > > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:suIk6.14267$[email hidden]... > > > > >"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > > > > > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO > > excuse > > > > for > > > > > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > > > > > > > > > > > Uh LOL sure David everybody is entitled to his opinion, whatever > > rationale > > > > it is.. ;) > > > > > > > > Did you scream that babbling in 1994 when Senna and Ratzenberger both > > died > > > > the same weekend, when Wendlinger got a severe crash at Monaco, when > > > > Barrichello had a death-defying crash from the lack of safety in > Imola's > > > > track configuration, etc..? > > > > > > > > Racing is dangerous. People have, are and will continue to be killed > or > > > > severely injured. Deal with it, or stop watching it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > > > > -- May the Downforce be with you... > > > > -- http://www.ymenard.com/ > > > > -- People think it must be fun to be a genius, but they don't realise > > how > > > > hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Don't try to make it some kind of dark conspiracy where I secretly posted David's comments in a dark room in a top secret newsgroup. *rolls eyes* The debate was taking place over there too and its a public newsgroup. -- Scott B. Husted "PA-Scott" ICQ# 4395450 "John" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:971pj0$sn0$[email hidden]... > Just didn't want you to be without the knowledge that Scott Husted > is getting you cooked over their hate to see anyone get blindsided behind > their back :) > >

Alan, Its no use.. he can't see the immense flaw in his illogical rationale. He likes to claim bigotry in the argument with me not being an F1 fan, yet he is the biggest one against NASCAR as an "inferior" type of racing that should be outlawed. -- Scott B. Husted "PA-Scott" ICQ# 4395450 "Alan Conceicao" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > F1 changed. NASCAR hasn't and > >won't. > > How do you know this? Are you god, by chance? > > >I doubt though that four will die in the space of nine > >months, and still no significant changes will be made. > > Again, you're combining multiple series. > > >That's funny. A NASCAR fan is on Jeopardy right now, and the comment she > >made was, "We don't all go to see the crashes." That she even felt compelled > >to say that....... > > Everyone in this country thinks the same thing about all motorsport. If you > believe otherwise, you're an idiot. I had a friend once tell me that I should > watch F1, because, and I quote, "The crashes are better." > > >So I'm wrong for saying NASCAR is poorly run motor sport for not making > >changes in the past, but then you say it needs to get it's act together and > >make changes now? > > Of course it needs changes. I believe that. The drivers believe that. But F1 is > not bulletproof either. That, and you show a disdain for Earnhardt that screams > "troll". After all, where were you when Irwin or Roper died? > > >Every person I've spoken to thinks NASCAR is a joke > >right now. > > Who do you talk to? If I ask cello players if speed metal is "good" music, what > are the chances I'll get the answer of "yes"? > > >I live in the fourth largest market in the U.S. > > Surprise surprise! Philadelphia DOES NOT represent all of America's interests! > > >One of the most > >listened to sports talk radio stations in the country is here > > Again, because of your market. > > >(never > >discusses NASCAR though, wonder why?) > > Dunno. WFAN In NYC, the most listened to of all sports stations in the country, > discusses NASCAR. Maybe you aren't meeting all the interests of those > listening. > > >I've been > >listening to NASCAR fans call in and desperately trying to convince the > >hosts and the public that their sport isn't badly run and basically the WWF > >on wheels. > > I believe there's a word for that. Its called "bias". > > >I am in the vast majority with my opinions > >on this subject. Maybe not on a newsgroup with NASCAR sim fans, but > >definitely within the general public. > > The general public doesn't know truth from hype. That's why they all still > think Mike Tyson is the best boxer in the world. The fact that its people like > you telling them what to believe doesn't help. > > And when will you learn that the US has citizens outside the boundaries of > Eastern PA? > > >The last thing I'll do is apologize for criticizing a sport which has > >had four deaths in nine months. > > The SI almanac lists NASCAR under the general heading of Motorsports, along > with F1, CART, IRL, etc. > > > > > Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: > "The Last American Hero" > R.I.P.

"Ignorance in the community" is the title of the thread. You are right, I was secretly starting a top secret conspiracy against you David. Shame on me. I took a public newsgroup post from the sim racing community and posted it on a public newsgroup with the sim racing community in which many visit both. -- Scott B. Husted "PA-Scott" ICQ# 4395450 "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Jk_k6.2623$[email hidden]... > Thanks. :-) I can't find that thread anywhere though. It says something > about Scott that he feels the need to take a post from this newsgroup to > another forum to generate criticism. > > I even stated when I started this thread that I had not replied to any of > the threads at this newsgroup (or anywhere else actually) concerning the > death of Earnhardt. > > David G Fisher > > "John" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:971pj0$sn0$[email hidden]... > > Just didn't want you to be without the knowledge that Scott Husted > > is getting you cooked over their hate to see anyone get blindsided behind > > their back :) > > > > >

Quoted text (8 lines)

>NASCAR: 39 races each season with an average of 40 drivers in each race... >= 1560 "drivers" start a race thruout a season.... > >Over four times as many drivers start a NASCAR race compared to F1 each >season... so for every NASCAR season you can count 4 years of F1. > >ed_ >

First, you're accounting for only 40 drivers (there's 43, but you may be doing the Winston and other specialty races too). Secondly, Dale Earnhardt is only the second Winston Cup series driver to die in that time period. F1, as has already been noted, had two in a weekend. Realistically, for each single season on NASCAR brand racing, you can count for TWELVE times the number of driver starts than in F1 (Craftsmen truck and Busch Series added in, of course). - Alan Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

Where did I mention Top fuel or funny car nitro cars? I said "drag racing" in general just like Stock car in general or open wheel racing in general. But drag racers don't go 320+km/h towards a hairpin turn either with a armco barrier to run head on into. Besides, the safety in top fuel and funny car is pretty amazing. They are all dangerous but to say one is more dangerous by a miles per death record is not logical. If that is the case then fishing is the most dangerous sport. It doesn't seem like a dangerous sport but more people are killed or injured doing it per year then any other. Alan Conceicao wrote:

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > >That is a pretty lame excuse. Miles per Death record? Or Miles for > >Injury? > >I guess drag racing is the most dangerous. The MPD must be damn high > >since they only do a 1/4 mile at a time. > > I don't remember F1 cars being able to accelerate from a dead stop to 400 kph > in 2 seconds either. Logic would dicate that it would be the most dangerous of > all motor sports. > > - > Alan > > Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: > "The Last American Hero" > R.I.P.

-- Solo1 C-Modified (CASC-OR/BARC) http://www.barc-oc.com http://www.casc.on.ca

Finally found it. It seems many of the replies actually agree with a lot of what I said (at least from the first 20 I bothered to read), which is pretty funny considering the forum. The funniest one is the first one below which is referring to your rant agaisnt me. "Scott, are you sure you aren't going a little overboard with your comments? You sound like a fanatic of some kind..." "Unfortunately in a lesser sense most of what he says is true. Safety of the drivers in my opinion is the most important thing. There is not need for the amount of casualties associated with stock car racing. That should be NASCARs focus right now, and it should have been before this." "Ill 2nd that." "I agree. While he went a little overboard with his critique of NASCAR, the gist of his message is correct IMHO, and greater focus should be placed on driver safety. The problem I have is the comparison between NASCAR and F1. It's like apples and oranges. F1 races are considerably shorter (in length and time), there are fewer races in a season, and the *average* speed of F1 cars are lower than those of NASCAR. In addition, the Those reasons alone, the chances of fatal accidents at F1 races are lower. Throw in the safety precautions F1 has taken does reduce this even more. However, while he does mention that no F1 drivers have died since 1994, he doesn't mention that a track worker died last year. Whether it be a driver, a fan or a track worker, the safety factor should extend in all directions..." Well as it was, Dale's accident was a 3 car accident, but you are right. I really feel 30 car packs is not good for the drivers. Me being a fan, I dont get off on 30 car packs like other people do. I would love a 2 car race just the same. 'But despite you point, most of which, I think, are valid to certain degrees. The fact of the matter is that the open wheeled world is the trailblazer here in terms of safety. Only 3 drivers have died in the past 20 years in F1. Let us not forget, that while these guys are in their little cocoon, their heads are still exposed. The only thing separating their head from the outside world is a helmet and the engine cowling\rollbar behind their head. Their (f1, CART) average speeds isnt as great as some of NASCAR's races, but their top speeds are far in excess of what NASCAR is doing these days. Did you happen to see the interview Darrell gave talking about F1's way of handling safety and NASCAR's way? Apparently F1 has all sorts of committees that just deals with safety issues, and they have each track throughly inpected by these committees and track officials. Also, the news report talked about how safety is handled by the NASCAR tracks themselves, as opposed to F1 that sets these very high standards universally and has their own roving contingent of emergency medical personnel. NASCAR seems to just leave these things up to the tracks. Apples and orange, yes...but i think there is a lesson or two for NASCAR somewhere in there." "No arguments here George. F1 collects huge fees from the teams just so they can race. As I recall 10 million or more. Lets say that is 15 mil to start each season with. Fees from merchandising, track royalties etc, and Bernie has a lot more money to spend than I imagine (key word here, imagine) than Nascar does. Nascar prides itself on being stock car racing (dont get me started, I wish it was stock car racing, or at least more stock then they are), basic 3400+ pound cars and huge HP that are supposed to remind americans of the good old muscle car days. F1 and Cart pride themselves on technology, be it motor, chassis, wings safety whatever they are about being cutting edge technology. Nascar needs to learn that being cutting edge on safety issues will not tarnish their reputation as a "run whatcha brung" stock car type series. Money and image are the primary factors here. The money can be found or secured if Nascar wants it to do the research, what Nascar needs to understand is that high tech will not ruin the perception of the sport. Common templates, aero packages, restrictor plates, indistinct car models etc have already done that." "I agree. We need to stop all this stuff and fix the problem. Nothing will change with tears, unless they stop." David G Fisher "Scott B. Husted" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > "Ignorance in the community" is the title of the thread. > > You are right, I was secretly starting a top secret conspiracy against you > David. Shame on me. I took a public newsgroup post from the sim racing > community and posted it on a public newsgroup with the sim racingcommunity

Quoted text (15 lines)

> in which many visit both. > > -- > Scott B. Husted > "PA-Scott" > ICQ# 4395450 > > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:Jk_k6.2623$[email hidden]... > > Thanks. :-) I can't find that thread anywhere though. It says something > > about Scott that he feels the need to take a post from this newsgroup to > > another forum to generate criticism. > > > > I even stated when I started this thread that I had not replied to any

of

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > the threads at this newsgroup (or anywhere else actually) concerning the > > death of Earnhardt. > > > > David G Fisher > > > > "John" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:971pj0$sn0$[email hidden]... > > > Just didn't want you to be without the knowledge that Scott Husted > > > is getting you cooked over their hate to see anyone get blindsided > behind > > > their back :) > > > > > > > > > >

Where exactly do you get your stats on "most sensible people"?You know David, if you could base your arguments on something other than your own bigotry and subjective interpretations of what has happened you might make a valid point now and again. Instead you've evaded the opportunity to address the statistical facts. We're not interested in the opinion of "everyone you've spoken to" or your evaluation of the performance of NASCAR fans on call-in shows. Your bigoted references to WWF betray your motives. You just don't like NASCAR or NASCAR fans because you identify them with a social class that you perceive yourself as being "better than". BD On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 00:42:03 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (20 lines)

> >I have news for you Don, most sensible people outside of the NASCAR fans >feel the same way I do. Every person I've spoken to thinks NASCAR is a joke >right now. I live in the fourth largest market in the U.S. One of the most >listened to sports talk radio stations in the country is here (never >discusses NASCAR though, wonder why?). Since Earnhardt's death, I've been >listening to NASCAR fans call in and desperately trying to convince the >hosts and the public that their sport isn't badly run and basically the WWF >on wheels. They failed miserably. I am in the vast majority with my opinions >on this subject. Maybe not on a newsgroup with NASCAR sim fans, but >definitely within the general public. Others in this thread agree with me as >well. The last thing I'll do is apologize for criticizing a sport which has >had four deaths in nine months. > >David G Fisher > >> > >> >>

On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 22:48:34 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >What the hell does mileage have to do with anything? NASCAR drivers rarely >use something called a brake pedal, so they will accumulate a lot of >mileage. Well, I can understand that you may have trouble answering the quantity of posts your trolling generated. But I thought you would have had time to engage some sort of logical processes after your initial outburst. You *really* can't understand that running a 1.1million man-mile season incurs far more risk and opportunities for mishap than a 70,000 man-mile season?!? The concept that a single year of WC/BGN/CTS racing is comparable (risk exposure) to over fifteen years of F1 action escapes you? Simply amazing. The only thing your reply does is further demonstrate your personal prejudices against a particular racing series and its fans and, in the process, undermine any shards of logic that may have been buried in your original tantrum. I always thought you enjoyed playing the role of RAS-iconoclast but actually had something useful to offer to the newsgroup from time to time. I admit now, I was totally wrong. You're just another troll, plain and simple. "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

You boys, girls, or whatever are so full of pathetic bullcrap and horsedung, it is sad. -- Don Burnette "Txl" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:nCLk6.2370$[email hidden]... > nascar is to the american public what the circus used to be for the > romans.... > The organizers/rulers of nascar get the money, as much money or more than > the leading drivers, without taking a risk. > But you can't say ANYTHING negative about the US here because it is just not > accpeted, it i part of american TRADITION (ha ha ha). > I am sure that if America had a sort of F1 championship at the time the roll > cage was invented they would have refused it for ten years arguing that > "it's for weenies" and "we are real men" and other bullshit. > Out of curiosity watch the TV ratings (and thus the money) on nascar's NEXT > race, everybody will watch, waiting for blood... > Pathetic american media, and the sad thing is that the general public gets > to be like that too, but it's not their fault they have nothing else to > watch... > > > > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> a �crit dans le message news: > DPHk6.464$[email hidden]... > > I find it really ridiculous that people are acting as if the death of a > > NASCAR driver is a tragedy. > > > > You knew it was going to happen, and so did I. It happens almost every > year. > > Three times last year alone. When you support an activity that you know > will > > result in the death of someone, then it's not a tragedy. It's simply > > disgusting. > > > > I keep hearing the phrase, "Death is a part of auto racing, and these > > drivers understand that but want to do it anyway." Bullshit. It isn't a > part > > of all types of auto racing. Just NASCAR. Formula 1 hasn't had a driver > die > > since 1994. Before that it was 1982. NASCAR is about beer and crashes. > > Safety is a science in F1, and their record proves it. They have the top > > experts in the world in charge of the safety of it's drivers. NASCAR is a > > joke and the modern equivalent of the galdiator races. > > > > If you support NASCAR, then you support the INEVITABLE death of it's > > drivers. How the hell are you then sad when one dies? Turns my stomach > when > > I read or see the melodramatic tributes to a fan favorite. I LOVE F1, but > if > > the drivers were dying I'd say close it down right now. I have said on > this > > newsgroup before that I didn't think the F1 drivers of the '60's as > modeled > > in GPL were brave, heroic or "real" drivers because they raced knowing > death > > was a real possibility. I think they were simply foolish people who didn't > > value their lives very much. > > > > There is NO reason why drivers have to die in NASCAR. It's simply a POORLY > > run, bush league type of auto racing with fans that apparently don't TRULY > > care about the safety of it's drivers. It's an embarrassment. Drivers > still > > have the choice of wearing open-faced helmets? Drivers have the choice to > > wear a neck brace that obviously could have saved the lives of previous > dead > > drivers? > > > > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excuse > for > > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > > > Shut it down or just count the races until the next dead driver is pulled > > from his car. Then the people who are in charge of NASCAR, and it's fans > can > > once again pay tribute to them. > > > > Pathetic. > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Jealousy is not a good virtue. -- Don Burnette "Txl" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:sMOk6.2431$[email hidden]... > well, the sotry of the brown paper bag is typical of the american way of > thinking, it's okay to get drunk on the street as long as you hide it in a > paper bag, even if everybody knows what's in the paperbag. > It's okay to fuck your secretary if you go to church on the sunday morning > with your loving wife and kids > > > > "Thom j." <[email hidden]> a �crit dans le message news: > gxOk6.2052$[email hidden]... > > Now Now Jan, We all don't drink beer here in the US you know!! We do > > have cheap "Thunderbird Wine" too! It's even better in a brown paper bag > > and especially while we're all hanging on street corners gettin` > > drunk...haha > > Cheers Thom_j. > > > > "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > | Hey... that's not so bad. If the beer were any good, that is. <g> > > | > > | Jan. > > | =--- > > | Don Chapman wrote... > > | > <snip> > > | > Yep, stupid American general public, we have nothing to watch > > | > but Nascar and nothing to drink but beer. > > | > > > | > > > | > > | > > > > > >

Lol Scott, Those pansy asses are too afraid to even try to pass each other. Don Burnette "Scott B. Husted" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > BTW.. it has little to do with whether or not I prefer F1 vs NASCAR. > > I love Touring Cars and Trans-Am... that doesn't make it justifiable in an > attempt to compare them to NASCAR. > > Let me know the next time you see 3 or more F1 cars going "door to door"for > lap after lap. Hell, let me know the next time the race finishes wherethe

Quoted text (16 lines)

> second place driver can actually see the winner as he takes the checkered > flag. > > -- > Scott B. Husted > "PA-Scott" > ICQ# 4395450 > > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:3LXk6.2492$[email hidden]... > > > If you haven't figured it out yet, autoracing is dangerous no matter > what > > > form of it you enjoy or watch. > > > > No, just badly organized auto racing is dangerous. 4 driver deaths in

nine

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > months in NASCAR. > > > > No driver deaths since 1994 in F1. > > > > Yes, we know how much you don't like F1. > > > > "If Michael Schumacher were my brother...I would ask him what it's like

to

Quoted text (18 lines)

> > drive in an open wheel "parade". Scott Husted > > > > Sorry Scott, but Michael Schumacher is the best driver in the world. > Likely > > the best driver in auto racing history. NASCAR drivers can only dream of > > having his ability. Actually, that's asking too much of them. > > > > Michael feels the same way about safety in auto racing as I do. Great > minds > > think alike. > > > > David G Fisher > > "NASCAR is farmers driving around in circles. " Eddie Irvine > > > > > > "Scott B. Husted" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:ifRk6.2284$[email hidden]... > > > Yeah.. F1 is the most advanced, high tech, orchestrated elitist

parade

Quoted text (42 lines)

> > in > > > auto racing. > > > > > > If you haven't figured it out yet, autoracing is dangerous no matter > what > > > form of it you enjoy or watch. > > > > > > -- > > > Scott B. Husted > > > PA-Scott > > > The Pits: PowerSims Magazine (http://www.theuspits.com) > > > > > > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:vCIk6.847$[email hidden]... > > > > No dead drivers in F1 since 1994. 1982 before that. > > > > > > > > Four dead in NASCAR in the past season + one race this year. > > > > > > > > NASCAR is a badly run auto racing series. F1 is light years ahead of > it. > > > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > > > > > > > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > > news:suIk6.14267$[email hidden]... > > > > > >"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > > > > > > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO > > > excuse > > > > > for > > > > > > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Uh LOL sure David everybody is entitled to his opinion, whatever > > > rationale > > > > > it is.. ;) > > > > > > > > > > Did you scream that babbling in 1994 when Senna and Ratzenberger > both > > > died > > > > > the same weekend, when Wendlinger got a severe crash at Monaco,

when

Quoted text (29 lines)

> > > > > Barrichello had a death-defying crash from the lack of safety in > > Imola's > > > > > track configuration, etc..? > > > > > > > > > > Racing is dangerous. People have, are and will continue to be > killed > > or > > > > > severely injured. Deal with it, or stop watching it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > > > > > -- May the Downforce be with you... > > > > > -- http://www.ymenard.com/ > > > > > -- People think it must be fun to be a genius, but they don't > realise > > > how > > > > > hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

No David.. everyone agrees, me included!, that NASCAR needs to address safety NOW. No arguments. However, your approach and delivery totally eluded that one point in your post that had any real validity to the equation. It is funny how you only posted those in initially agreement, but not the others that countered. You did a good job of "picking" from the posts. Many of those later admit that your delivery of the message left alot to be desired. (Which I found to be an understatement.) After the statement about the fanatic, there was a response immediately following that sums it up nicely as well: "Don't you think the guy who made the ridiculous post in the first place was a fanatic and a little "overboard"?" "David Fisher has made the stupidest post I've ever read, by anyone." "Typical. Another loony who compares the safety record of a series that runs 1/2 as much, 2/3rd fewer laps with 1/2 the racers, using cars that way 1200lbs with 3000lbs downforce. Furthermore name me a corner on any F1 circuit that has sustained speeds of 180mph, where the drivers run inches apart, using 3500lbs cars??? There simply ISN'T a comparison. Each series has it's own special needs to provide safety to it's participants. Comparing one against the other doesn't save any lives. It simply confuses the issue and wastes time. NASCAR does need to do something. No doubt. NASCAR drivers need to do something as well.....there are safety devices available that might, could, provide additional injury protection. To the best of my knowledge NASCAR hasn't outlawed the usage of any of these devices....it's a matter of personal choice for the drivers." -- Scott B. Husted "PA-Scott" ICQ# 4395450

I know. I just had to make the points in case no one else did. I've seen trolls in every other NG I've been to. Not new at all. He'll be in the kill-file soon.

Quoted text (11 lines)

>Alan, > >Its no use.. he can't see the immense flaw in his illogical rationale. > >He likes to claim bigotry in the argument with me not being an F1 fan, yet >he is the biggest one against NASCAR as an "inferior" type of racing that >should be outlawed. >-- >Scott B. Husted >"PA-Scott" >ICQ# 4395450

Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

*applause* -- Scott B. Husted "PA-Scott" ICQ# 4395450 "Bob Davidson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Where exactly do you get your stats on "most sensible people"?You know > David, if you could base your arguments on something other than your > own bigotry and subjective interpretations of what has happened you > might make a valid point now and again. Instead you've evaded the > opportunity to address the statistical facts. We're not interested in > the opinion of "everyone you've spoken to" or your evaluation of the > performance of NASCAR fans on call-in shows. Your bigoted references > to WWF betray your motives. You just don't like NASCAR or NASCAR fans > because you identify them with a social class that you perceive > yourself as being "better than". > > > BD > > > > On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 00:42:03 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > > > > >I have news for you Don, most sensible people outside of the NASCAR fans > >feel the same way I do. Every person I've spoken to thinks NASCAR is a joke > >right now. I live in the fourth largest market in the U.S. One of the most > >listened to sports talk radio stations in the country is here (never > >discusses NASCAR though, wonder why?). Since Earnhardt's death, I've been > >listening to NASCAR fans call in and desperately trying to convince the > >hosts and the public that their sport isn't badly run and basically the WWF > >on wheels. They failed miserably. I am in the vast majority with my opinions > >on this subject. Maybe not on a newsgroup with NASCAR sim fans, but > >definitely within the general public. Others in this thread agree with me as > >well. The last thing I'll do is apologize for criticizing a sport which has > >had four deaths in nine months. > > > >David G Fisher > > > > >> > > >> > >> >

>I said "drag racing" in general just like Stock car in general or open >wheel racing in general. But drag racers don't go 320+km/h towards a >hairpin turn either with a armco barrier to run head on into. >>They are all dangerous but to say one is more dangerous by a miles per >death record is not logical. Its a miracle that they haven't had 4 deaths in the Top Fuel ranks alone. The point of "logic" was that in no other form of motorsport does a vehicle acclerate and de-accelerate that quickly. It has a far higher risk factor than NASCAR, and its safety innovations are far behind any other form of racing (unless you count 90% nitro a innovation). >If that is the case then fishing is the most dangerous sport. It doesn't >seem like a dangerous sport but more people are killed or injured doing >it per year then any other. > Millions more people fish then drag race. Its a comparison of apples and oranges. Its not as valid an argument. - Alan Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

"Scott B. Husted" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> No David.. everyone agrees, me included!, that NASCAR needs to address > safety NOW. No arguments. However, your approach and delivery totally > eluded that one point in your post that had any real validity to the > equation. > > It is funny how you only posted those in initially agreement, but not the > others that countered. You did a good job of "picking" from the posts. > Many of those later admit that your delivery of the message left alot to

be > desired. (Which I found to be an understatement.) Considering I didn't even know my post was repeated in that forum, and therefor had no chance to reply to anyone, you're damn right I'm going to pick the posts that agreed with me. Quite a few did. I think you expected a much rougher response towards me from that forum than you got. Sorry you were disappointed. You say, "NASCAR needs to address safety NOW". That's why I condemn it as a poor form of motorsports. It should always be addressing safety. The death of four drivers in nine months should not need to be the trigger for change. Here's some changes for you: HANS device mandatory. Full helmets mandatory. Driver moved to the middle of the car. Widen the tracks. Yes, the crowd will no longer be able to be right up on top of the track. Too bad. Replace the concrete walls with a new, cutting edge technology. There has to be something better than concrete. Call F1 for some ideas. Smaller field of cars. No forced, artificial pack racing. Those are some simple solutions from someone who has zero interest in NASCAR. Why can't the geniuses running the sport figure this s**t out themselves? David G Fisher

Ok. The only point I wanted to make was that Nascar has clearly been more dangerous than F1 over the last 10 years, and is clearly much more dangerous today. "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:wfZk6.2582$[email hidden]... > I said there were no driver deaths since 1994. No errors there. > > David G Fisher

I have given stats. NASCAR = four deaths in nine months. F1= zero deaths in seven years. NASCAR fans find these stats acceptable by continuing to support this form of motor racing "as is". The people who run the sport accept these stats. That's why I, and many others, see this as a poor form of auto racing. Add in the fact that the drivers are often old and chubby, and that they run on tracks where turning left is the only requirement, and the cars are low tech boats, and drinking lots and lots of beer is a requirement of the fans, then you begin to understand our views. David G Fisher "Bob Davidson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (23 lines)

> Where exactly do you get your stats on "most sensible people"?You know > David, if you could base your arguments on something other than your > own bigotry and subjective interpretations of what has happened you > might make a valid point now and again. Instead you've evaded the > opportunity to address the statistical facts. We're not interested in > the opinion of "everyone you've spoken to" or your evaluation of the > performance of NASCAR fans on call-in shows. Your bigoted references > to WWF betray your motives. You just don't like NASCAR or NASCAR fans > because you identify them with a social class that you perceive > yourself as being "better than". > > > BD > > > > On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 00:42:03 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > > > > >I have news for you Don, most sensible people outside of the NASCAR fans > >feel the same way I do. Every person I've spoken to thinks NASCAR is a

joke > >right now. I live in the fourth largest market in the U.S. One of themost > >listened to sports talk radio stations in the country is here (never > >discusses NASCAR though, wonder why?). Since Earnhardt's death, I've been > >listening to NASCAR fans call in and desperately trying to convince the > >hosts and the public that their sport isn't badly run and basically theWWF > >on wheels. They failed miserably. I am in the vast majority with myopinions > >on this subject. Maybe not on a newsgroup with NASCAR sim fans, but > >definitely within the general public. Others in this thread agree with meas > >well. The last thing I'll do is apologize for criticizing a sport whichhas

Quoted text (9 lines)

> >had four deaths in nine months. > > > >David G Fisher > > > > >> > > >> > >> >

"Alan Conceicao" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > Give us some > >RACING, that is what is lacking from F1 these days. And from CART forthat > >matter as well. > > Why? Have you missed the last three Michigan 500s or something? :) > - > Alan I should have been a-bit more precise...sorry...in general, the short ovals have really declined. I remember when Mikey Andretti would be cutting left right and sideways passing people...doesn't seem to happen with the reduced wing settings they use now. The cars/drivers are getting so equal that even on the road courses, passing is getting tougher....only the Hanford Device tracks seem to have lots of passing. dave henrie

I'm not the only one in this thread who thinks the "mileage" arguement is extremely flawed. AO feels the same way. David G Fisher "Jeff Vincent" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 22:48:34 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >What the hell does mileage have to do with anything? NASCAR driversrarely

Quoted text (28 lines)

> >use something called a brake pedal, so they will accumulate a lot of > >mileage. > > Well, I can understand that you may have trouble answering the > quantity of posts your trolling generated. > > But I thought you would have had time to engage some sort of > logical processes after your initial outburst. > > You *really* can't understand that running a 1.1million man-mile > season incurs far more risk and opportunities for mishap than a 70,000 > man-mile season?!? The concept that a single year of WC/BGN/CTS > racing is comparable (risk exposure) to over fifteen years of F1 > action escapes you? Simply amazing. > > The only thing your reply does is further demonstrate your personal > prejudices against a particular racing series and its fans and, in the > process, undermine any shards of logic that may have been buried in > your original tantrum. > > I always thought you enjoyed playing the role of RAS-iconoclast but > actually had something useful to offer to the newsgroup from time to > time. I admit now, I was totally wrong. You're just another troll, > plain and simple. > > "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was > nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into > a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

I believe drag racing camne out with the HALON fire suppression systems and they have amazing fire suits. Their cars also have break away/ crumple zones like a F1 and CART car does to help absorb impact. They have a very good drivers roll cage and it prevents side to side neck damage like the high sides on a F1 cockpit. Also most of drag racers wear the HANS device and other types of neck and head support. Drive shaft loops and scatter sheilds. Belts holding the engine together incase they blow and many other safety devices. I would say that is more advanced then NASCAR and right up there with F1 and CART. "Its safety innovations are far behind any other form of racing > (unless you count 90% nitro a innovation). > > Millions more people fish then drag race. Its a comparison of apples and > oranges. Its not as valid an argument. You are right it isn't valid. I was just proving a point that the Deaths Per mile isn't valid either. It is rather retarded. -- Solo1 C-Modified (CASC-OR/BARC) http://www.barc-oc.com http://www.casc.on.ca

On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 20:15:07 GMT, Barton Brown <[email hidden]> wrote: >Man, I gotta hand it to you: this is the single most incredible piece of >flamebait I've seen in this forum in five or so years of dropping in >here -- true Troll-Hall-of-Fame-quality nonsense. I award you the >Fran�ois Menard Memorial Golden Turd with dingleberry clusters and >undigested peanuts. Bravo! U R awesome! I agree, he's good at what he does (useless as that may be). "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

Point, Set & Match Ed.. :o) Touche` Cheers Thom_j. "Ed Solheim" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:4EZk6.1170$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (22 lines)

| | David G Fisher wrote: | > For the umpteenth time, there have been four driver deaths in NASCAR in | the | > past nine months. No driver deaths in F1 since 1994. | | Lets do some math: | | F1: 16 [17] races each season with 20 [22] drivers in each race... | = 374 "drivers" start a race thruout a season... (based on 17 races a | season) | | NASCAR: 39 races each season with an average of 40 drivers in each race... | = 1560 "drivers" start a race thruout a season.... | | Over four times as many drivers start a NASCAR race compared to F1 each | season... so for every NASCAR season you can count 4 years of F1. | | ed_ | | |

There is no point in debating this. You have your opinion I'll have mine. Alan Orton wrote:

Quoted text (29 lines)

> > I believe drag racing camne out with the HALON fire suppression systems > and they have amazing fire suits. Their cars also have break away/ > crumple zones like a F1 and CART car does to help absorb impact. They > have a very good drivers roll cage and it prevents side to side neck > damage like the high sides on a F1 cockpit. Also most of drag racers > wear the HANS device and other types of neck and head support. Drive > shaft loops and scatter sheilds. Belts holding the engine together > incase they blow and many other safety devices. > > I would say that is more advanced then NASCAR and right up there with F1 > and CART. > > "Its safety innovations are far behind any other form of racing > > (unless you count 90% nitro a innovation). > > > > > Millions more people fish then drag race. Its a comparison of apples and > > oranges. Its not as valid an argument. > > You are right it isn't valid. I was just proving a point that the Deaths > Per mile isn't valid either. > > It is rather retarded. > > -- > Solo1 C-Modified (CASC-OR/BARC) > http://www.barc-oc.com > http://www.casc.on.c

>"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > NASCAR drivers rarely use something called a brake pedal, I'm sorry but this whole thread is a mess... Cmon David, your "bigotry" to the sport is apparent. Stop going to the extremes, your ridiculising yourself. You had a point, which actually could had holded if you did not go that far. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- People think it must be fun to be a genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

So a 50-race F1 season would be just as safe as a 17-race F1 season? And if you started 50 cars per race, it would have the same level of risk as starting 22? And you think that the number of starters and the miles they cover per season have no impact whatsoever on the level of risk of a given series? On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 20:42:00 GMT, Alan Orton <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (16 lines)

>That is a pretty lame excuse. Miles per Death record? Or Miles for >Injury? >I guess drag racing is the most dangerous. The MPD must be damn high >since they only do a 1/4 mile at a time. > >Lee Buchanan wrote: >> >> You fail to note how many more miles NASCAR drivers run--in Winston Cup >> alone, let alone the other series. There are many, many more opportunities >> for crashes and injuries. > > >-- >Solo1 C-Modified (CASC-OR/BARC) >http://www.barc-oc.com >http://www.casc.on.ca

"But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 03:36:07 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I have given stats. > >NASCAR = four deaths in nine months. > >F1= zero deaths in seven years. > You ingnore the stats regarding sport participation vs mortality. Then you carefully choose your timeframe for measuring mortality and ignore the other stats offered. This destroys your statistical validity. >NASCAR fans find these stats acceptable by continuing to support this form >of motor racing "as is". The people who run the sport accept these stats. Actually, you don't know if they are going to accept these stats or not. I bet we see some changes.

Quoted text (7 lines)

>That's why I, and many others, see this as a poor form of auto racing. Add >in the fact that the drivers are often old and chubby, and that they run on >tracks where turning left is the only requirement, and the cars are low tech >boats, and drinking lots and lots of beer is a requirement of the fans, >then you begin to understand our views. > >David G Fisher

In truth you see NASCAR as you do because of the bigotry I've already mentioned. You just re-confirmed it. BD

On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 03:39:14 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I'm not the only one in this thread who thinks the "mileage" arguement is >extremely flawed. AO feels the same way. Hmmm, 134 posts and counting and one person agrees with you. There's "a majority of sensible people"... :) "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

I think you give me too much credit David. I wasn't "disappointed" in the least. I have been lurking over here for years and I often post over on Jacobs server about topics and items I find on RAS. Don't feel too special about. The reason they can't "figure it out" is because your suggestions make no sense to the sport of NASCAR Racing outside of the soft wall technology. You can mandate the hans device and put airbags in the car as far as I'm concerned, it won't guarantee drivers won't die when they go from 170+ mph to 0. NASCAR racing is NOT F1 or any other form of ROAD RACING. Its a unique form of racing and if you can't accept that fact, then you shouldn't watch it because all the drivers and true fans understand the risks involved. The human body does not tolerate those kind of g-forces well no matter what device you are wearing. You can wear whatever you want in NASCAR as some drivers have worn the Hans device and some chose not too. It's a conscious decision on their part. Not having a full helmet had no effect on what happened to DE from anything I have read. The rest of your ideas don't have any bearing worth responding too. The only thing you left out was replacing the V8s with Briggs and Stratons and require all the cars to have governors and limiters keeping them under the 5mph bumper test limits. -- Scott B. Husted "PA-Scott" ICQ# 4395450

I might not agree with your orginal post, David. But everyone is entitled to their own opinion and I respect that. But, imo, I do find that the miles per deaths theory has some fatal flaws. There are just too many varibles. David G Fisher wrote:

Quoted text (41 lines)

> > I'm not the only one in this thread who thinks the "mileage" arguement is > extremely flawed. AO feels the same way. > > David G Fisher > > "Jeff Vincent" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 22:48:34 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> > > wrote: > > > > >What the hell does mileage have to do with anything? NASCAR drivers > rarely > > >use something called a brake pedal, so they will accumulate a lot of > > >mileage. > > > > Well, I can understand that you may have trouble answering the > > quantity of posts your trolling generated. > > > > But I thought you would have had time to engage some sort of > > logical processes after your initial outburst. > > > > You *really* can't understand that running a 1.1million man-mile > > season incurs far more risk and opportunities for mishap than a 70,000 > > man-mile season?!? The concept that a single year of WC/BGN/CTS > > racing is comparable (risk exposure) to over fifteen years of F1 > > action escapes you? Simply amazing. > > > > The only thing your reply does is further demonstrate your personal > > prejudices against a particular racing series and its fans and, in the > > process, undermine any shards of logic that may have been buried in > > your original tantrum. > > > > I always thought you enjoyed playing the role of RAS-iconoclast but > > actually had something useful to offer to the newsgroup from time to > > time. I admit now, I was totally wrong. You're just another troll, > > plain and simple. > > > > "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was > > nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into > > a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

-- Solo1 C-Modified (CASC-OR/BARC) 76 Trans-Am 600+hp http://www.barc-oc.com http://www.casc.on.ca

On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 00:42:04 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I said there were no driver deaths since 1994. No errors there. That's right. In David's elitist little world, only F1 drivers count. Little people like corner marshalls or beer-drinking NASCAR-fan trash (which, of course, describes *all* NASCAR fans) don't count. Acknowledging a death caused by his precious F1 drivers ("where safety is a science!") might tarnish their superior safety record. "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

There are too many variables involved to have it based on a miles per incident. Sure you are increasing your odds of a death with a longer season but it doesn't make it anymore dangerous. You could have a 1 race season and have 5 deaths but then run a 500 race season and have none. Just like russian roulette. With each pull of the trigger does it make it more dangerous? no, it just increases the odds. There is a difference. Jeff Vincent wrote:

Quoted text (33 lines)

> > So a 50-race F1 season would be just as safe as a 17-race F1 > season? > > And if you started 50 cars per race, it would have the same level > of risk as starting 22? > > And you think that the number of starters and the miles they cover > per season have no impact whatsoever on the level of risk of a given > series? > > On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 20:42:00 GMT, Alan Orton <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >That is a pretty lame excuse. Miles per Death record? Or Miles for > >Injury? > >I guess drag racing is the most dangerous. The MPD must be damn high > >since they only do a 1/4 mile at a time. > > > >Lee Buchanan wrote: > >> > >> You fail to note how many more miles NASCAR drivers run--in Winston Cup > >> alone, let alone the other series. There are many, many more opportunities > >> for crashes and injuries. > > > > > >-- > >Solo1 C-Modified (CASC-OR/BARC) > >http://www.barc-oc.com > >http://www.casc.on.ca > > "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was > nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into > a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 23:28:17 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: [snip] >There is a sports radio station in Philadelphia that is one of the most >listened to in the country, and no one ever mentions NASCAR. The NFL, NBA, >MLB, NHL, college basketball, colege football, just about anything BUT >NASCAR is discussed by the hosts and the callers. I'm from Philly, and you're not telling the whole story. They don't mention ANY motor racing on WIP because they're die-hard stick and ball guys. That station is lame, talking about the same tired crap day-in and day-out. They actually had to get away from an all-sports format because it was so dry and repetitive nobody could stand it for more than an hour. Instead of expanding the sports topics and letting people talk about racing, they entertain bullshit questions like what you should be getting your wife for Valentines Day. They also let Monday morning quarterbacks who can't even form a complete sentence drone on about Jeff Lurie and the sad-sack Eagles, but shoot down anyone who tries to mention any type of racing as a toothless hick. Tim

>HANS device mandatory. > >Full helmets mandatory. Neither would have helped Dale, but it could go through and could be beneficial. Hopefully, it can be made less bulky in some way so that its easier to escape from a burning vehicle. >Driver moved to the middle of the car. I doubt it will happen. The manufacturers and purists would have a fit. That and it would only help in driver's side impacts, none of which were the cause of death for any of the 4 drivers you so campaign for. >Widen the tracks. Yes, the crowd will no longer be able to be right up on >top of the track. Too bad. 5 wide instead of 3 wide won't save anyone. >Replace the concrete walls with a new, cutting edge technology. There has to >be something better than concrete. Call F1 for some ideas. > I agree for the most part. The system used at Indy during the IROC race would be a huge improvement...it probably saved Arie's life. >Smaller field of cars. 1. NASCAR has something F1 doesn't. Its called parity. Hence, those in NASCAR generally don't have to deal with traffic in the way F1 drivers do. 2. Cost: Unless you shoot costs up, and I mean WAY up, the sponsors and teams will NEVER let this through. >No forced, artificial pack racing. You want to see what Daytona is like w/o plates? Watch the truck race. Oddly, they still run in packs, and still need the draft. Removing plates won't work either: having a car go airborne at 230mph and kill the driver and fans is less tolerable to 180mph and only killing the driver. >Those are some simple solutions from someone who has zero interest in >NASCAR. Why can't the geniuses running the sport figure this s**t out >themselves? Only the soft wall and helmet rules would be effective or have a chance at ever passing. Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

>Add >in the fact that the drivers are often old and chubby, So what happens if Nigel Mansell comes back? What about Mario Andretti and AJ Foyt, guys who, when racing in the early 90 and late 80s were hardly nubile? How did Earnhardt run an Enduro as well as open wheel drivers? > and that they run on >tracks where turning left is the only requirement Sears Point? Portland? Watkins Glen? >and the cars are low tech >boats Get this: They're SUPPOSED to be like production model cars. > and drinking lots and lots of beer is a requirement of the fans So you're an elitest? Why didn't you say that at the start? Hell, you probably like Rally too, even though it has the dumbest fans on earth ("lets run out on the road....yea!"). -and you're still combining multiple racing series under one banner for your own use, get off it- Alan Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

Quoted text (7 lines)

> That's right. In David's elitist little world, only F1 drivers >count. Little people like corner marshalls or beer-drinking >NASCAR-fan trash (which, of course, describes *all* NASCAR fans) don't >count. Acknowledging a death caused by his precious F1 drivers >("where safety is a science!") might tarnish their superior safety >record. >

That, and none of us know the statistics on F3000 and other developmental series in Europe. I doubt their record has been perfect. - Alan Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

Art McEwen wrote: > > Paul Newman was in this year's Daytona 24hours and he's into his 70's, my > dad says you need less sleep as you get older. Yeah, but likely as not you have to pee more often -- depends... BB

David, Next year there might be no deaths in NASCAR then all of a sudden have(god forbid) six in F1. That doesn't make NASCAR any better or worse and the same with F1. It is just the way it is. I'm not denying the fact that NASCAR could improve it's safety but death depends on which way the cards fall. Shumey could have been easily killed or that one F1 driver who flipped in the sand and got his head squashed or many other F1 incidents. How about JV's crash at Spa? He could of easily died there as well. F1 has just been lucky and NASCAR hasn't. A few years ago CART was unlucky losing several drivers. It wasn't because their cars weren't safe it was just bad luck. But I like how CART is trying everything in their power to avoid another which is a reason why they mandated the HANS for the ovals. I hope NASCAR does the same. It is all luck, err more like bad luck. David G Fisher wrote:

Quoted text (66 lines)

> > I have given stats. > > NASCAR = four deaths in nine months. > > F1= zero deaths in seven years. > > NASCAR fans find these stats acceptable by continuing to support this form > of motor racing "as is". The people who run the sport accept these stats. > That's why I, and many others, see this as a poor form of auto racing. Add > in the fact that the drivers are often old and chubby, and that they run on > tracks where turning left is the only requirement, and the cars are low tech > boats, and drinking lots and lots of beer is a requirement of the fans, > then you begin to understand our views. > > David G Fisher > > "Bob Davidson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Where exactly do you get your stats on "most sensible people"?You know > > David, if you could base your arguments on something other than your > > own bigotry and subjective interpretations of what has happened you > > might make a valid point now and again. Instead you've evaded the > > opportunity to address the statistical facts. We're not interested in > > the opinion of "everyone you've spoken to" or your evaluation of the > > performance of NASCAR fans on call-in shows. Your bigoted references > > to WWF betray your motives. You just don't like NASCAR or NASCAR fans > > because you identify them with a social class that you perceive > > yourself as being "better than". > > > > > > BD > > > > > > > > On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 00:42:03 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >I have news for you Don, most sensible people outside of the NASCAR fans > > >feel the same way I do. Every person I've spoken to thinks NASCAR is a > joke > > >right now. I live in the fourth largest market in the U.S. One of the > most > > >listened to sports talk radio stations in the country is here (never > > >discusses NASCAR though, wonder why?). Since Earnhardt's death, I've been > > >listening to NASCAR fans call in and desperately trying to convince the > > >hosts and the public that their sport isn't badly run and basically the > WWF > > >on wheels. They failed miserably. I am in the vast majority with my > opinions > > >on this subject. Maybe not on a newsgroup with NASCAR sim fans, but > > >definitely within the general public. Others in this thread agree with me > as > > >well. The last thing I'll do is apologize for criticizing a sport which > has > > >had four deaths in nine months. > > > > > >David G Fisher > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >

-- Solo1 C-Modified (CASC-OR/BARC) 76 Trans-Am 600+hp http://www.barc-oc.com http://www.casc.on.ca

Dave Henrie wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > "L_NiN0" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:2kYk6.154188$[email hidden]... > > REAL MEN DRIVE RALLY > > > > REAL CARS - REAL ROADS - REAL SKILL > I'll agree with all that except the real cars part. The cars run the > premier > Rally events are shells, everthing below the surface is not even close to > whats on the 'real' cars. case in point: Find out how long in minutes and > how many steps it takes to start Richard Burn's Subaru.... > As for the rest...the top drivers are truly SOME of the best racers > around. > dave henrie

Hear! Hear! AND they wear open-face helmets, as do many drivers in FIA GT classes. BB

On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 00:42:03 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: [snip]

Quoted text (11 lines)

>I used to race a motocross bike. 100mph on unfamiliar terrain, with trees 10 >feet to either side of me. No rollcage. I guess my skin was my rollcage. >Launched myself high in the air, etc. People used to tell me how brave I was >to do that. I told them there was no bravery involved at all. I was simply >having foolish fun. Bravery is forcing yourself to do something for the >greater good, even when you're afraid to do so. I wanted to ride the cycle. >Race car drivers want to race. They aren't forced to. I realized what I was >doing was foolish because IMO, all a person is doing when they die while >"playing" is avoiding a lifetime of responsibilities, and giving up the >opportunity to counter all the bad there is in this world with their own >good.

Hey, what kind of bike did you have? What series did you race in? Tim

[snip] Hey, what kind of bike did you have? What series did you race in? Tim

On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 04:59:22 GMT, Barton Brown <[email hidden]> wrote: >Hear! Hear! AND they wear open-face helmets, as do many drivers in FIA >GT classes. Actually, since Colin's San Remo accident last year(where he broke his jaw), he and Carlos Sainz began running with integral helmets. Recently I saw several other WRC drivers doing the same here at the Swedish Rally. /Magnus GPLRank hcp: -41.66

"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:W60l6.14297$[email hidden]... > >"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > > NASCAR drivers rarely use something called a brake pedal, > > > I'm sorry but this whole thread is a mess... I've about had it with this thread as well. Predictably, the NASCAR fans on this newgroup exhibitied the same denial in this thread that NASCAR fans all over the country have been exhibiting since the death of the three drivers last year, and since Earnhardt's death. They will continue to so after the next NASCAR driver is killed due to piss poor management of the sport. David G Fisher

Agree 100%. The approach was just a little bumpy. ;) Scott B. Husted wrote: > > No David.. everyone agrees, me included!, that NASCAR needs to address > safety NOW.

(I know David's not even listening, but I think Alan and I can actually have a conversation here, so bear with me...) On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 04:19:31 GMT, Alan Orton <[email hidden]> wrote: >There are too many variables involved to have it based on a miles per >incident. > >Sure you are increasing your odds of a death with a longer season but it >doesn't make it anymore dangerous. You could have a 1 race season and >have 5 deaths but then run a 500 race season and have none. A longer season doesn't make a *given race* any more dangerous. But if you are a driver in the series with a full-time ride (ie: most professional NASCAR and F1 drivers) and have to participate in every race, the *season* taken as a whole will be more dangerous if it is longer. You didn't address field size, which is included in the death per man-miles stats. Having twice as many drivers in a field puts twice as many drivers at peril, increasing the risk (not even taking into account the potentially higher risk from more traffic). David proposes to evaluate safety based upon an arbitrary season length (or calendar period, to be more precise), despite a vastly different number of races and race lengths. And ignoring the fact that he is comparing three NASCAR series with some 110 or so drivers to the 22 drivers in F1. The point is, using the death per man-miles stat is an attempt to *remove the variables* of disparate field size and season/race length. OTOH, David's "stats" ignores those variables. BTW, using the "no more dangerous" logic, 95% or so of the NASCAR races last year were "not dangerous", only the races that drivers died in were "dangerous". I don't think that definition of "dangerous" is terribly useful. There were probably more dangerous tracks where nothing happened (Indy, for instance) and the fatalities may have happened at less dangerous tracks (perhaps Texas). >Just like russian roulette. With each pull of the trigger does it make >it more dangerous? no, it just increases the odds. There is a >difference. That's the way real life is. Statistics are a mathematical abstraction to understand the "lumpiness" of real life events. Standing out in a lightning storm is dangerous (statistically speaking), but that doesn't mean you'll get hit by lightning. Over a sufficient period of time, these "lumps" will even out, and real life will approach the statistical model. That's why I contend that deaths per man-miles is a more relevant measure of safety than comparing the number of deaths over an arbitrary calendar period in two radically-different-sized series. "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

>I've about had it with this thread as well. > Sure helps when you dodge anything with coherent thought applied to it. - Alan Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

David God Fisher gurgled: >> Here's some changes for you: HANS device mandatory. Full helmets mandatory. Driver moved to the middle of the car. << Geeze, David God, the next thing you know you'll be asking the FIA, ACO, SCCA, and every sanctioning body that runs GT, sedan, rally and closed prototypes to do the same thing. Check out LeMans, BPR, DTM, BTCC, WRC, ALMS, Grand Am...well, I think you get the picture -- every sanctioning body that runs closed cars with full windshields allows open-faced helmets, seating wherever the guy who designed the car put it, and very few sanctioning bodies have made the HANS device mandatory. Wonderful things that they are, neither a HANS device that he didn't have nor the full-face helmet that he did could have prevented Senna's freak accident at Imola. Your gibbering about NASCAR drivers not using brakes is the purest banana oil, as you well know: it would be exceptionally hard to get around Bristol, let alone Sears Point and Watkins Glen, without judicious use of the brakes. Ever see the brakes in a Cup car? No, they're not carbon/carbon (neither are those of CART/IRL), but they ARE monstrous whopping Wilwood or similar calipers clamping huge rotors with amazing force. I'd have to say that Dale Sr and Jr coming in second in the Daytona 24 this year argues persuasively that they know how to drive, as does the many stellar performances by Mark Martin, Robby Gordon, John Andretti and many other NASCAR regulars who've done very successful stints in other forms of racing The worst part of your troll-that-tried-to-become-a-rational-argument-and-utterly-failed is your statistical nonsense. No comparative statistical models of death/injury in different arenas of motorsport can be made without taking into account the number of man-miles drive (n drivers X n races of n laps of n miles per season) and then the variables of how many and which sections of those races are at what speeds -- as far as I know, no one has died clouting the barrier at Ste. Devote in Monaco, which is taken at a ridiculously slow speed, while Spa, for instance, has taken many a soul in its long, high-speed sweeps. Just like you wouldn't expect many life-threatening incidents at Martinsville, while Talladega and Daytona, restrictor plates and high-drag body mods notwithstanding, are still 180+mph with a 3500-pound mass. Simply saying "four dead in NASCAR since the beginning of last season and none in F1 since 1994" is anecdotal, not statistical. I would be willing to bet that even a simple statistical model, based on man-miles alone, of motorsport over the last 25 years, would show that NASCAR is as safe as, or safer than, any other form of racing you can name. You want statistics? Ask Doug Milliken -- he hangs around in here from time to time. He and his father and their colleagues have worked at the Cornell Labs in the most extensive and exhaustive statistical and test modeling of vehicular accidents ever done on the planet. Get the REAL story before you spout your drivel. The most telling part of your hysterical rant is your characterization of NASCAR fans as the original Boobus Americanus, drowned in beer and eager for "Dukes of Hazzard"-style wrecks and a whiff of blood. That's just uninformed and stupid, and reflects *your* bias and nothing else. I'm an old geeze, and I've been to every kind of automotive event you can imagine, from the Pebble Beach Concours to a stage of the Pirelli/Mobil Rally in England to a local dirt track in the wilds of Upstate New York to every USGP held at Watkins Glen from 1962 until they went bust, Formula 500O and TransAm at Mosport, IMSA GT and WSC at Lime Rock, vintage races all over the east coast and west, and yes, NASCAR -- at Darlington, Dover, Watkins Glen, and The Brickyard. Race fans are the same everywhere. I've seen dead-drunk puds at the USGP burning a chartered bus in the Bog and I've had long and interesting conversations with engineers in the stands at Darlington. The crowds are all the same everywhere -- the lager louts and the gentleman sportsmen and every shading of the human condition in between. NASCAR has its problems (and what sanctioning body doesn't?), but it is an essentially well-run machine with people that truly care just as deeply about racing as anyone you'll find at Ferrari or Williams. Don't forget that in the '80s, F1 and World Sports Cars had a spate of dead and maimed drivers and mechanics; that in the late '80s an entire class of rally cars -- the aptly-yclept Killer Bees -- were outlawed because of spectator deaths. And especially don't forget that 25 laps before Dale Earnhardt was killed helping his teammate Michael Waltrip win his first Cup victory in 463 tries, Tony Stewart was in a wild airborne ride during which he hit at least four cars at very high speed, and the outer skin of his car was pretty much completely torn off. Would you have wanted to have been in an accident like that in an F1 car, or an Indy car? You could have HANS devices attached to every member of your body and a full-face helmet made of Kryptonite, and I don't think you would have walked away, as Stewart did, with a simple dislocated shoulder. NASCAR has a problem with retaining walls, just as CART/IRL does. Whatever your wearing on your head, you simply cannot decelerate a 3500-pound car from 180mph to zero in 2 feet and not get your eggs scrambled. Period. In fact, if Earnhardt had been wearing a full-face helmet, the added mass would have broken the base of his skull even MORE massively, and I don't think a HANS device would have done much good -- people are regularly killed on the highway in high speed/short crush decelerations just by the mass of their brains impacting the interior of their cranial cavity. Somebody's got to find a solution to retaining walls that's better than concrete. Look at the short runoff and retaining wall at Imola (because of the river behind it) that killed Senna, look at the into-the-wall accidents that have plagued CART and the IRL for years. If you actually believe the nonsense you've spouted here on this subject, I pray you never pass your driver's test and get a license (apparently won't have to worry about that for another 5 or 6 years, judging from your writing). You can pick up your F.M.M. Golden Turd award at Frankie Menard's chateau in suburban Montreal at your convenience... Bart Brown

I agree having more drivers will make it more dangerous and increase the odds of something going wrong. Or if the races are longer maybe it will increase the danger due to fatigue but I'm still sticking to my story that the longer the season it doesn't become more "dangerous" unless fatigue is a issue but it just increases the odds of something happening. The last race is just as "dangerous" as the first, danger is a constant varible. But I understand what you are saying, I think. The longer the season the greater the chances of something happening but is that increasing the danger or the odds? Maybe I just don't understand exactly what you mean, I don't know. Maybe we are talking about the same thing but on different wavelenghts. I'm not sure. > (I know David's not even listening, but I think Alan and I can > actually have a conversation here, so bear with me...) Hehe. David proposes to evaluate safety based upon an arbitrary season > length (or calendar period, to be more precise), despite a vastly > different number of races and race lengths. And ignoring the fact > that he is comparing three NASCAR series with some 110 or so drivers > to the 22 drivers in F1. There is a flaw in that I agree. You do get a distorted view of things. NASCAR has increased odds of things happening but it doesn't nessesarly mean it is more dangerous except that they do have more drivers. To be honest I don't know what is more dangerous and I don't really care. I just like to see racing organizations coming out with new technology be it performance or safety or anything else new. > The point is, using the death per man-miles stat is an attempt to > *remove the variables* of disparate field size and season/race length. > OTOH, David's "stats" ignores those variables. You can use it if you want. ;) But they are both dangerous and it doesn't really matter which is better or worst. I'm not much of a stats man myself. > I don't think that definition of "dangerous" is > terribly useful. There were probably more dangerous tracks where > nothing happened (Indy, for instance) and the fatalities may have > happened at less dangerous tracks (perhaps Texas). The way I see this is the danger is always there even if there was no results(wrecks/injury). It is a constant varible. It is just a matter of odds before something happens. This would be alot easier if they ran on one track 20 times over,hehe. ;)

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > That's the way real life is. Statistics are a mathematical > abstraction to understand the "lumpiness" of real life events. > Standing out in a lightning storm is dangerous (statistically > speaking), but that doesn't mean you'll get hit by lightning. Over a > sufficient period of time, these "lumps" will even out, and real life > will approach the statistical model.

I agree with you on this. It is dangerous either way you look at it, you are playing with odds and it will get you sooner or later. > That's why I contend that deaths per man-miles is a more relevant > measure of safety than comparing the number of deaths over an > arbitrary calendar period in two radically-different-sized series. > You could use that method to get a rough idea I guess and it would "level the playing field" but there are still a lot of varibles. Was it a safety issue that caused the death or was it something else such as a health issue or driver error or poor judgement or maybe mechanical breakage like Shummey's at Monaco which could of tossed him in for a big drink out of the tunnel. There are some wrecks that NASA couldn't even help prevent a death. That kind of death doesn't make it unsafe, that is just bad luck. Or do you consider every death a knock against safety? My brain is starting to hurt,hehe. Not even sure what this debate is about,hehe. getting late. You can respond if you want, Jeff. But I'm done with this thread. You do have a point and it could give you an idea of the ratio between each series.

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >You knew it was going to happen, and so did I. So did the drivers in the race. Who the hell are you to tell them what risks they should be allowed to take? Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment

>Maybe I just don't understand exactly what you mean, I don't know. Maybe >we are talking about the same thing but on different wavelenghts. I'm >not sure. I think the fact that NASCAR is comprised of three independant series as opposed to F1's single is one of his key points as well. Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

Barton: What do you think the chances are that he'll respond? :) -thinks its one of the best posts he's ever read- Alan >Geeze, David God, the next thing you know you'll be asking the FIA, ACO, >SCCA, and every <snip all great material> Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

"Steve Blankenship" <[email hidden]> wrote: >http://www.speedvision.com/pub/articles/racing/08inews/010219a.html Bravo, well said. Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >For the umpteenth time, there have been four driver deaths in NASCAR in the >past nine months. No driver deaths in F1 since 1994. Please desist in this silly argument by statistics. As many such counter-examples have already shown, your selective statistics are meaningless. Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I have given stats. "There are lies, damnable lies, and statistics." Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment

> For the umpteenth time, there have been four driver deaths in NASCAR inthe > past nine months. No driver deaths in F1 since 1994. It's a badly runsport > because these deaths could have been prevented ( the HANS device certainly > would helped). Maybe these deaths could have been prevented and I surely wish they would have, but there is no way to know for sure. In your opinion, was F1 a badly run sport for 50 years up until the 1994 tragedies? You seem to think that the only form of legitimate auto racing is post 1994 F1. There were four deaths in 3 different series in Nascar. I am not disputing that Nascar needs to do something. They do. One death in 100 years is too much in my opinion, but the main point of my original post was that ALL forms of auto racing are dangerous and have death as a potential outcome! In your original post, you made rash statments about deaths in auto racing like, "Bullshit. It isn't a part of all types of auto racing. Just NASCAR. Formula 1 hasn't had a driver die since 1994. Before that it was 1982. NASCAR is about beer and crashes. Safety is a science in F1, and their record proves it." and " If you support NASCAR, then you support the INEVITABLE death of it's drivers. How the hell are you then sad when one dies? Turns my stomach when I read or see the melodramatic tributes to a fan favorite" These are the irrational, prejudiced and uniformed statements I was disputing. Let me tell you about safety in F1. You seem to be harping on the HANS device which I agree should be mandated in all forms of auto racing. But let's see, how many major racing series have required this device? NONE until this year, 2001. This will be the first season that it is mandated in F1, CART, and I believe the IRL. But guess what, Robert Hubbard invented the HANS Device with Jim Downing in the early 1980's!! The early 1980's!! So why is F1 just now implementing this device twenty years later if they are all about safety!! From Autoracing1.com: "Perhaps the most compelling fact about the HANS� Device is that not a single driver who has worn one in a crash has suffered a neck or head injury. With more than 250 units currently in use, the HANS� Device works every time according to its co-creator Bob Hubbard." Ok, so it sounds great, and again I agree it should be mandated and it may have prevented the Nascar deaths of the past nine months, but again, if it is that cut and dry then why is F1 just now requiring the use of this device?? After Tony Roper died in the truck race at Texas last year, a bunch of the drivers went and got fitted for the device and ran with it at Fontana. So, even though it was not mandated, the drivers were smart enough to realize the necessity of this device. How many F1 drivers used the HANS device last year? I don't know, I'm asking. I saw every F1 race last year and I do not believe I ever saw Michael Schumacher using the HANS device. Maybe I am wrong. I have seen in your other posts that you are championing Michael Schumacher as some kind of safety king who can do no wrong and may be the greatest driver of all time. First off let me state that I am a huge Formula One fan and I have been following it since the early 70's. Let me also state that I am somewhat of a Michael Schumacher fan. However, I also have enough commen sense to be able to make unbiased judgements when it comes to Forumula One, Nascar, CART, IRL, and its drivers. Let's talk about Michael Schumacher and safety in racing. I think he may be one of the greatest "driving" technicians. However, his "racing" abilities are very questionable. He punted Damon Hill out of his chance for the championship in 1995 and tried to do the same thing to Jacques Villinueve in 1997. Last year he pulled a blocking move on Mikka that if not for Mikka's amazing reflexes could have resulted in a terrible accident for both of them. He blocked Coulthard, and he caused a pile up on a re-start and blamed others when his late breaking tactics resulted in an accident. He could not even race wheel to wheel with his own brother without crashing into him. The point is, this is not safe driving. This is very unsafe driving and there are drivers in F1 who think Michael should have been put on probabtion for some of these moves. Did F1A put him on probation, no! > How can you discount the past nine months? F1 evolved after the death of > Senna (no deaths since), if it hadn't and drivers continued to die due to > poor management, then I'd criticize it the same way I've criticizedNASCAR. > NASCAR does not evolve. It just continues to deny that anything can bedone > to make it safer. The past nine months prove that. It's a badly run sportif > for no other reason then their continued failure to make a device such as > the HANS mandatory. First of all, I am not discounting the last nine months. It is terrible and NASCAR will evolve or I will discontinue watching the series myself. What I am disputing is your contention that F1 is some safety innovator and is 100% safe. My only point was, up until the last nine months, Nascar basically equaled F1 in deaths of the past decade. Historically, all saftey changes in racing have come AFTER tragedy. Would Senna have been saved by the HANS device? No one will ever know, but it surely would have been available if they had really wanted it. My guess is F1 has probably been testing this device for years and just now feel that it is time to make it mandatory. CART has followed suit. I am glad for this. I sure as hell hope that Nascar follows. But if your supposed safety leader had not yet implemented it as mandatory, you can hardly point to Nascar and claim its a badly run sport that equals the WWF. Last year F1 did not make the HANS device mandatory, so was it a badly run sport? Pedro de La Rossa and Johnny Hebert both had terrible crashes that they were lucky to walk away from. Can this be attributed to safety in F1, probably, but I guarantee those drivers looked death in the face for a few seconds. Did they have the HANS device? Nascar also had some terrible looking crashes that the drivers walked away from without a scratch. Was that just dumb luck, or are there aactually safety features that saved these drivers. Speaking of that, if F1 is so safe, why did a course worker die. Because he was in a restricted area? Why was he able to get into a restricted area? Why was a spectator able to get on the damn track at Hockenheim!! How safe was that for the drivers and the disgruntled fan? If F1 puts safety ahead of the "circus" then why does Eau Rouge still exist at SPA? This has got to be the most dangerous stretch of track in F1. Have you seen the horrific accidents that have happend there in practice? Talk about luck. How about this? I saw one of your other posts suggesting that Nascar call F1 to get ideas on replacing their concrete walls. Well, if F1 is so concerned about safety, why are they running at Indianapolis on half an oval at high speeds with concrete walls on both sides and running in the RAIN! Talk about unsafe. Even Nascar, IRL and CART are smart enough to not run on high speed ovals in the rain. I was there in turn one, and believe me I was scared about the start. I was praying these guys would make it through ok. Fortunately they did, and the race had few incidents. However, there had been concerns about the high speed turns and the concrete walls. But you want to know the main reason F1 ran there? It was the largest attended F1 race in history which equals money. FIA even awarded it F1 event of the year, concrete walls be damned. > I used to race a motocross bike. 100mph on unfamiliar terrain, with trees10 > feet to either side of me. No rollcage. I guess my skin was my rollcage. > Launched myself high in the air, etc. People used to tell me how brave Iwas > to do that. I told them there was no bravery involved at all. I was simply > having foolish fun. Bravery is forcing yourself to do something for the > greater good, even when you're afraid to do so. I wanted to ride thecycle. > Race car drivers want to race. They aren't forced to. I realized what Iwas > doing was foolish because IMO, all a person is doing when they die while > "playing" is avoiding a lifetime of responsibilities, and giving up the > opportunity to counter all the bad there is in this world with their own > good. Ok, I don't even understand your point here. Are you a racing fan or not? Do you understand that without drivers like Juan Manuel Fangio, Alberto Ascari, Jimmy Clark, Jackie Stewart, Emmerson Fittapaldi, Gilles Villenueve, etc. that Formula One would not exist? All I was doing was trying to point out the stupidity of the following assesment: "I don't think the F1 drivers of the '60's as modeled in GPL were brave, heroic or "real" drivers because they raced knowing death was a real possibility. I think they were simply foolish people who didn't value their lives very much." So you understand that based on this statement, all race drivers are foolish people. ALL race drivers race knowing death is a real possibility. ALL of them! Do you really think the Formula One drivers today think they are immune to death in their sport? If you really think this, then there is really no reason for me to even continue with this post. You do understand that auto racing would not exist today if people had not been willing to risk life and limb. You do understand that sports like mountain climbing, skiing, skydiving, surfing, and kayaking(to name a few), produce deaths every year as well. Are these just foolish people also? Do you drive a car? Do you understand that you risk possible death every time you drive that car? Please go tell AJ Foyt, Mario Andretti, Dan Gurney and Jackie Stewart that they are foolish people who were not "real" drivers. Was Michael Schumacher not a real driver in 1993 when the possibility of death in F1 still existed? I think the "real" F1 drivers of today would love to hear from you that their sport is 100% safe and that death is no longer a real possibility. What a revelation! > The point is, there have been none since 1994. F1 changed. NASCAR hasn'tand > won't. More drivers will die soon. Bet on it. Could a F1 driver die soon > too? Absolutely. I doubt though that four will die in the space of nine > months, and still no significant changes will be made. I will absolutely NOT bet on a driver dying soon in any series. That is just sick!!! You know, I don't think that there has ever been 4 driver deaths in nine months in Nascar, EVER. I am trying to make sure of this now. Do I wish Nascar had made a change that could have saved Earnhardt, Roper, Irwin, Petty? You bet I do. They better make changes. To say they will not is just pure speculation. Keep in mind, your whole theory here is based on the HANS device being required and the assumption that this would have saved their lives. No racing series required this last year. Its been 9 months since the first Nascar death last year. Hopefully changes will be made soon and fast. How long did it take for F1 to make its changes after Senna's death?!?! Do they do it in less than nine months? > That's funny. A NASCAR fan is on Jeopardy right now, and the comment she > made was, "We don't all go to see the crashes." That she even feltcompelled > to say that....... And your point is? Have you ever been to a Nascar race? Have your ever known a Nascar fan? Why do you harp on the beer and racing connection as if Nascar has some monopoly on it? Have you ever been to an F1 event? Have you ever heard of major F1 supporter and advertiser, "Fosters"? Have you ever heard of a motorsports fan, someone who can appreciate drivers and fans of all types of racing without feeling the need to claim one as superior over the other? > So I'm wrong for saying NASCAR is poorly run motor sport for not making > changes in the past, but then you say it needs to get it's act togetherand > make changes now? No, I said you were wrong for making irrational, mindless statements like: " If you support NASCAR, then you support the INEVITABLE death of it's drivers. How the hell are you then sad when one dies? Turns my stomach when I read or see the melodramatic tributes to a fan favorite" But now I am repeating myself. > I have news for you Don, most sensible people outside of the NASCAR fans > feel the same way I do. Every person I've spoken to thinks NASCAR is ajoke > right now. I live in the fourth largest market in the U.S. One of the most > listened to sports talk radio stations in the country is here (never > discusses NASCAR though, wonder why?). Since Earnhardt's death, I've been > listening to NASCAR fans call in and desperately trying to convince the > hosts and the public that their sport isn't badly run and basically theWWF > on wheels. They failed miserably. I am in the vast majority with myopinions, > on this subject. Maybe not on a newsgroup with NASCAR sim fans, but > definitely within the general public. Others in this thread agree with meas > well. The last thing I'll do is apologize for criticizing a sport whichhas > had four deaths in nine months. Most sensible people outside of Nascar fans feel the same way you do? Really? That is why it is the highest attended sport in the US? Just a bunch of dumb, insensible, beer swilling rednecks from the South who somehow manage to get on Jeporday every now and again. Are you serious? Do you understand that Nascar sells out in such minor markets as the Los Angeles California area? Did you know that Nascar sells out in Arizona, Nevada, Michigan, New Hampshire, Delaware, and Pennsylvania? Did you know that those states are not in "the deep south". Are you attacking my character? Am I not a sensible person? I think in reading the vast number of posts on this particular thread you've started, that I have been one of the most objective and up until now relatively civil, given the arrogance, prejudice, and poor judgement you used. Every person you've spoken to thinks Nascar is a joke? Really? Wow, how many total people was that? Nascar is never discussed on your big market sports talk radio? Hmm, but you just said the Nascar fans have been calling in about Earnhardt. Guess they must be all calling in long distance from the South! And I'll bet that the calls about F1 are just flowing in every week on this station. Where do you think I live? You are seriously stereotyping Nascar fans with your statements. Also, have you really looked at the threads you've generated here? There are FAR more against you than with you. And finally, I do not want you to apologize for criticizing Nascar. It deserves to be criticized and scrutinized right now. What I was hoping you would apologize for is the crass, rude, insensitive, prejudiced and ultimately sick way you went about it. In your post you demeaned Nascar fans, you demeaned Nascar drivers living and fallen, and you even managed to demean the early pioneers of all forms of motorsport. You ignorantly portrayed F1 governing bodies as safety innovators, who always put safety ahead of money and the "circus", which history clearly shows is not true. You ignorantly portrayed F1 racing as immune to deaths from racing incidents. You arrongantly portrayed F1 drivers and fans as superior to all other forms of motorsport. I was merely giving you a way to apologize for these transgressions. If the true purpose of your post had been to criticize Nascar to help further safety measures, then you would probably have been better off e-mailing Nascar or starting a petition that all fans of motorsport could get behind. Instead you wrote an inflammatory post that served no purpose but to generate needless debate at a sad time for all motorsports fans. Like I said in my original repsonse, I thought I remembered you as a sensible person from past contributions to this group and I was hoping to give you a chance to explain yourself, or at least explain the mean spirited aspects of your post. Unfortunately, you have shown your true colors and I will ignore your future posts from now on. This was truly a troll post if there ever was one. Here is to a safe motorsports season for all! Don Chapman

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> I agree having more drivers will make it more dangerous and increase the > odds of something going wrong. Or if the races are longer maybe it will > increase the danger due to fatigue but I'm still sticking to my story > that the longer the season it doesn't become more "dangerous" unless > fatigue is a issue but it just increases the odds of something > happening. The last race is just as "dangerous" as the first, danger is > a constant varible.

Try a different angle. How about we try skydiving example, forget motor racing. 22 Skydivers, 1 giving the previous diver a 10-20 second freefall break before he jumps. They come into contact occassionally with each other briefly during small periods of the freefall. They jump once every few weeks. 42 Skydivers, jumping simultaneously merging with small groups and doing tricks. Majority of the freefall skydivers are often very close to other divers. They jump once a week. Both have similar associated risks as their parachute not opening and hitting the ground at high speed. However, the statistical risk would suggest the 2nd group of skydivers would be more likely to result in injury or fatality than the first. Based on volume of divers, regularity of the dive, contact between other divers and causing an accident. Cheers, Rod.

Barton always has a lot to say to everybody (I don't mean that he needs to learn how to edit, although that would help too), but I learned long ago to ignore him. NASCAR fans can continue to make up statistics to try to defend the sorry state of their motor sport, but the facts are that F1 has a much more advanced way of handling driver safety than NASCAR. F1 is cutting edge. F1 has a more advanced way of handling almost everything involved in their series compared to NASCAR. They seek out the world's experts on car and track safety. They spend millions researching safety. F1 has a 100+ member emergency medical crew that travels to each race. F1 has a board of safety that deals (surprise) solely with safety issues. F1 inspects each track itself, instead of leaving it up to the track owners as in NASCAR. Extremely high high standards must be met or there is no race. The above is just general information. Anyone who wants to do some serious research into NASCAR and F1 safety is free to do so. They will be amazed to see how much of a difference there is between the two series. They will also find out the real reasons why four have died in NASCAR recently, and none in F1 in seven years. They will find out that F1 will not tolerate the sh*t that's happened in NASCAR this past year. They will find out that fans of F1 wouldn't tolerate the sh*t that's happening in NASCAR. They will understand why, "Death is a part of racing" is such a bullsh*t line, and they'll realize what a bush league sport NASCAR is. David G Fisher "Alan Conceicao" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> Barton: What do you think the chances are that he'll respond? :) > > -thinks its one of the best posts he's ever read- > Alan > > >Geeze, David God, the next thing you know you'll be asking the FIA, ACO, > >SCCA, and every <snip all great material> > > > > Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: > "The Last American Hero" > R.I.P.

Since David is no longer responding to the mess he created , and I spent so much time on this final follow up, I hope you all will forgive the fact that I have continued this topic by creating a new thread and essentially posting twice. If I offend I apologize, but this guy really hit a nerve. David, I did not want you to apologize for criticizing Nascar. It deserves to be scrutinized right now. What I was hoping you would apologize for is the crass, rude, insensitive, prejudiced and ultimately sick way you went about it. In your post you demeaned Nascar fans, you demeaned Nascar drivers living and fallen, and you even managed to demean the early pioneers of all forms of motorsport. In my opinion, you demeaned motorsports fans in general. You ignorantly portrayed F1 governing bodies as safety innovators, who always put safety ahead of money and the "circus", which history clearly shows is not true. You ignorantly portrayed F1 racing as immune to deaths from racing incidents. You arrongantly portrayed F1 drivers and fans as superior to all other forms of motorsport. I was merely giving you a way to apologize for these transgressions. If the true purpose of your post had been to criticize Nascar to help further safety measures, then you would probably have been better off e-mailing Nascar or starting a petition that all fans of motorsport could get behind. Instead you wrote an inflammatory post that served no purpose but to generate needless debate at a sad time for all motorsports fans. Like I said in my original repsonse, I thought I remembered you as a sensible person from past contributions to this group and I was hoping to give you a chance to explain yourself, or at least explain the mean spirited aspects of your post. Unfortunately, you have shown your true colors and I will ignore your future posts from now on. This was truely a troll post if there ever was one. Here is wishing for a safe remaining motorsports season for all! Don Chapman Read on if interested: -----Final Response---------------------------------------------------------------- > David wrote: > For the umpteenth time, there have been four driver deaths in NASCAR inthe > past nine months. No driver deaths in F1 since 1994. It's a badly runsport > because these deaths could have been prevented ( the HANS device certainly > would helped). Maybe these deaths could have been prevented and I surely wish they would have, but there is no way to know for sure. In your opinion, was F1 a badly run sport for 50 years up until the 1994 tragedies? You seem to think that the only form of legitimate auto racing is post 1994 F1. There were four deaths in 3 different series in Nascar. I am not disputing that Nascar needs to do something. They do. One death in 100 years is too much in my opinion, but the main point of my original post was that ALL forms of auto racing are dangerous and have death as a potential outcome! In your original post, you made rash statments about deaths in auto racing like, "Bullshit. It isn't a part of all types of auto racing. Just NASCAR. Formula 1 hasn't had a driver die since 1994. Before that it was 1982. NASCAR is about beer and crashes. Safety is a science in F1, and their record proves it." and " If you support NASCAR, then you support the INEVITABLE death of it's drivers. How the hell are you then sad when one dies? Turns my stomach when I read or see the melodramatic tributes to a fan favorite" These are the irrational, prejudiced and uniformed statements I was disputing. Let me tell you about safety in F1. You seem to be harping on the HANS device which I agree should be mandated in all forms of auto racing. But let's see, how many major racing series have required this device? NONE until this year, 2001. This will be the first season that it is mandated in F1, CART, and I believe the IRL. But guess what, Robert Hubbard invented the HANS Device with Jim Downing in the early 1980's!! The early 1980's!! So why is F1 just now implementing this device twenty years later if they are all about safety!! From Autoracing1.com: "Perhaps the most compelling fact about the HANS� Device is that not a single driver who has worn one in a crash has suffered a neck or head injury. With more than 250 units currently in use, the HANS� Device works every time according to its co-creator Bob Hubbard." Ok, so it sounds great, and again I agree it should be mandated and it may have prevented the Nascar deaths of the past nine months, but again, if it is that cut and dry, then why is F1 just now requiring the use of this device?? After Tony Roper died in the truck race at Texas last year, a bunch of the drivers went and got fitted for the device and ran with it at Fontana. So, even though it was not mandated, the drivers were smart enough to realize the necessity of this device. How many F1 drivers used the HANS device last year? I don't know, I'm asking. I saw every F1 race last year and I do not believe I ever saw Michael Schumacher using the HANS device. Maybe I am wrong. I have seen in your other posts that you are championing Michael Schumacher as some kind of safety king who can do no wrong and may be the greatest driver of all time. First off let me state that I am a huge Formula One fan and I have been following it since the early 70's. Let me also state that I am somewhat of a Michael Schumacher fan. However, I also have enough commen sense to be able to make unbiased judgements when it comes to Forumula One, Nascar, CART, IRL, and its drivers. Let's talk about Michael Schumacher and safety in racing. I think he may be one of the greatest "driving" technicians. However, his "racing" abilities are very questionable. He punted Damon Hill out of his chance for the championship in 1995 and tried to do the same thing to Jacques Villenueve in 1997. Last year he pulled a blocking move on Mikka that if not for Mikka's amazing reflexes could have resulted in a terrible accident for both of them. He blocked Coulthard, and he caused a pile up on a re-start and blamed others when his late breaking tactics resulted in an accident. He could not even race wheel to wheel with his own brother without crashing into him. The point is, this is not safe driving. This is very unsafe driving and there are drivers in F1 who think Michael should have been put on probabtion for some of these moves. Did FIA put him on probation, no! Why? Because he is the star driver. > How can you discount the past nine months? F1 evolved after the death of > Senna (no deaths since), if it hadn't and drivers continued to die due to > poor management, then I'd criticize it the same way I've criticizedNASCAR. > NASCAR does not evolve. It just continues to deny that anything can bedone > to make it safer. The past nine months prove that. It's a badly run sportif > for no other reason then their continued failure to make a device such as > the HANS mandatory. First of all, I am not discounting the last nine months. It is terrible and NASCAR will evolve or I will discontinue watching the series myself. What I am disputing is your contention that F1 is some safety innovator and is 100% safe. My only point was, up until the last nine months, Nascar basically equaled F1 in deaths of the past decade. Historically, all saftey changes in racing have come AFTER tragedy. Would Senna have been saved by the HANS device? No one will ever know, but it surely would have been available if they had really wanted it. My guess is F1 has probably been testing this device for years and just now feel that it is time to make it mandatory. CART has followed suit. I am glad for this. I sure as hell hope that Nascar follows. But if your supposed safety leader had not yet implemented it as mandatory, you can hardly point to Nascar and claim its a badly run sport that equals the WWF. Last year F1 did not make the HANS device mandatory, so was it a badly run sport then? Pedro de La Rossa and Johnny Herbert both had terrible crashes that they were lucky to walk away from. Can this be attributed to safety in F1, probably, but I guarantee those drivers looked death in the face for a few seconds. Did they have the HANS device? Nascar also had some terrible looking crashes that the drivers walked away from without a scratch. Was that just dumb luck, or are there actually safety features that saved these drivers. Speaking of that, if F1 is so safe, why did a course worker die. Because he was in a restricted area? Why was he able to get into a restricted area? Why was a spectator able to get on the damn track at Hockenheim!! How safe was that for the drivers and the disgruntled fan? If F1 puts safety ahead of the "circus" then why does Eau Rouge still exist at SPA? This has got to be the most dangerous stretch of track in F1. Have you seen the horrific accidents that have happend there in practice? Talk about luck. How about this? I saw one of your other posts suggesting that Nascar call F1 to get ideas on replacing their concrete walls. Well, if F1 is so concerned about safety, why are they running at Indianapolis on half an oval at high speeds with concrete walls on both sides and running in the RAIN! Talk about unsafe. Even Nascar, IRL and CART are smart enough to not run on high speed ovals in the rain. I was there in turn one, and believe me I was scared about the start. I was praying these guys would make it through ok. Fortunately they did, and the race had few incidents. However, there had been concerns about the high speed turns and the concrete walls. But you want to know the main reason F1 ran there? It was the largest attended F1 race in history which equals money. FIA even awarded it F1 event of the year, concrete walls be damned. > I used to race a motocross bike. 100mph on unfamiliar terrain, with trees10 > feet to either side of me. No rollcage. I guess my skin was my rollcage. > Launched myself high in the air, etc. People used to tell me how brave Iwas > to do that. I told them there was no bravery involved at all. I was simply > having foolish fun. Bravery is forcing yourself to do something for the > greater good, even when you're afraid to do so. I wanted to ride thecycle. > Race car drivers want to race. They aren't forced to. I realized what Iwas > doing was foolish because IMO, all a person is doing when they die while > "playing" is avoiding a lifetime of responsibilities, and giving up the > opportunity to counter all the bad there is in this world with their own > good. Ok, I don't even understand your point here. Are you a racing fan or not? Do you understand that without drivers like Juan Manuel Fangio, Alberto Ascari, Jimmy Clark, Jackie Stewart, Emmerson Fittapaldi, Gilles Villenueve, etc. that Formula One would not exist? All I was doing was trying to point out the stupidity of the following assesment: "I don't think the F1 drivers of the '60's as modeled in GPL were brave, heroic or "real" drivers because they raced knowing death was a real possibility. I think they were simply foolish people who didn't value their lives very much." So you understand that based on this statement, all race drivers are foolish people. ALL race drivers race knowing death is a real possibility. ALL of them! Do you really think the Formula One drivers today think they are immune to death in their sport? If you really think this, then there is really no reason for me to even continue with this post. You do understand that auto racing would not exist today if people had not been willing to risk life and limb. You do understand that sports like mountain climbing, skiing, skydiving, surfing, and kayaking(to name a few), produce deaths every year as well. Are these just foolish people also? Do you drive a car? Do you understand that you risk possible death every time you drive that car? Please go tell AJ Foyt, Mario Andretti, Dan Gurney and Jackie Stewart that they are foolish people who were not "real" drivers. Was Michael Schumacher not a real driver in 1993 when the possibility of death in F1 still existed? Was Senna not a "real" driver because he raced during a time when death was possible in F1? I think the "real" F1 drivers of today would love to hear from you that their sport is 100% safe and that death is no longer a real possibility. What a revelation! > The point is, there have been none since 1994. F1 changed. NASCAR hasn'tand > won't. More drivers will die soon. Bet on it. Could a F1 driver die soon > too? Absolutely. I doubt though that four will die in the space of nine > months, and still no significant changes will be made. I will absolutely NOT bet on a driver dying soon in any series. That is just sick!!! You know, I don't think that there has ever been 4 driver deaths in nine months in Nascar, EVER. I am trying to make sure of this now. Do I wish Nascar had made a change that could have saved Earnhardt, Roper, Irwin, Petty? You bet I do. They better make changes. To say they will not is just pure speculation. Keep in mind, your whole theory here is based on the HANS device being required and the assumption that this would have saved their lives. No major racing series required this last year. Its been 9 months since the first Nascar death last year. Hopefully changes will be made soon and fast. How long did it take for F1 to make its changes after Senna's death?!?! Did they do it in less than nine months? > That's funny. A NASCAR fan is on Jeopardy right now, and the comment she > made was, "We don't all go to see the crashes." That she even feltcompelled > to say that....... And your point is? Have you ever been to a Nascar race? Have your ever known a Nascar fan? Why do you harp on the beer and racing connection as if Nascar has some monopoly on it? Have you ever been to an F1 event? Have you ever heard of major F1 supporter and advertiser, "Fosters"? Have you ever heard of a motorsports fan, someone who can appreciate drivers and fans of all types of racing without feeling the need to claim one as superior over the other? > So I'm wrong for saying NASCAR is poorly run motor sport for not making > changes in the past, but then you say it needs to get it's act togetherand > make changes now? No, I said you were wrong for making irrational, mindless statements like: " If you support NASCAR, then you support the INEVITABLE death of it's drivers. How the hell are you then sad when one dies? Turns my stomach when I read or see the melodramatic tributes to a fan favorite" But now I am repeating myself. > I have news for you Don, most sensible people outside of the NASCAR fans > feel the same way I do. Every person I've spoken to thinks NASCAR is ajoke > right now. I live in the fourth largest market in the U.S. One of the most > listened to sports talk radio stations in the country is here (never > discusses NASCAR though, wonder why?). Since Earnhardt's death, I've been > listening to NASCAR fans call in and desperately trying to convince the > hosts and the public that their sport isn't badly run and basically theWWF > on wheels. They failed miserably. I am in the vast majority with myopinions, > on this subject. Maybe not on a newsgroup with NASCAR sim fans, but > definitely within the general public. Others in this thread agree with meas > well. The last thing I'll do is apologize for criticizing a sport whichhas > had four deaths in nine months. Most sensible people outside of Nascar fans feel the same way you do? Really? That is why it is the highest attended sport in the US? Just a bunch of dumb, insensible, beer swilling rednecks from the South who somehow manage to get on Jeopardy every now and again. Are you serious? Do you understand that Nascar sells out in such minor markets as the Los Angeles California area? Did you know that Nascar sells out in Arizona, Nevada, Michigan, New Hampshire, Delaware, and Pennsylvania? Did you know that those states are not in "the deep south". Are you attacking my character? Am I not a sensible person? I think in reading the vast number of posts on this particular thread you've started, that I have been one of the most objective and up until now relatively civil, given the arrogance, prejudice, and poor judgement you used. Every person you've spoken to thinks Nascar is a joke? Really? Wow, how many total people was that? Nascar is never discussed on your big market sports talk radio? Hmm, but you just said the Nascar fans have been calling in about Earnhardt. Guess they must be all calling in long distance from the South! And I'll bet that the calls about F1 are just flowing in every week on this station. Where do you think I live? You are seriously stereotyping Nascar fans with your statements. Also, have you really looked at the threads you've generated here? There are FAR more against you than with you. ---- First Response---------------------------------------------------------- David, I find it unbelieveable that a fan of auto racing would have an opinion like this. I am a fan of all motorsports and unfortunately they are all dangerous. Death is a possibilty in ALL motorsports. To think differently is to be very, very naive. Yes, Nascar does need to look at safety issues, and they need to do it quickly, but to make claims that Formula 1 is the safest, and that they put safety first is ridiculous. No form of auto racing is 100% safe and never will be. Every day you drive your car, you are risking your own life to some extent. Hundreds(maybe thousands) of deaths happen everyday on the highways of the world due to stupidity, lack of safety features, poorly designed roads and traffic signals, or just too much speed. Cars in general are very dangerous, yet we don't shut down the highways. You have obviously not been a fan of Forumla One for very long to make such unintelligent statements like this, "I LOVE F1, but if the drivers were dying I'd say close it down right now." You think 1994 was a banner year for Formula 1? There was even a lawsuit on that! You don't think that the FIA, FOCA, and the track owners made knee jerk reactions after the death of Senna? Yes, they made changes but it was AFTER the tragedy. The past 9 months have been very bad for Nascar. However, do you know how many Winston Cup Nascar drivers had died before the year 2000? As far as Winston Cup in the 90's, I believe there were two: Neil Bonnet's death in 1994(Daytona) and J.D. McDuffie in 1991(Watkins Glen). This is the same number of drivers that died in F1 in the 90's. If you add in the Busch Series, Craftsman Trucks, and ARCA, then I think there were 3 more(John Nemechek , Rodney Orr , Clifford Allison ). Formula 1 had two deaths in the 90's(Senna and Ratzenberger ). I do not know how many deaths could be attributed to the Formula One minor leagues such as Formula 3000. CART/IRL had 5 deaths in the 90's! Let's shut down the Indianapolis 500 as well!!(2 deaths in the 90's). How many deaths were there in Drag Racing, Rallying, Touring Cars, LeMans/Sportscars, Sprint cars, Cycling etc.? I don't know myself, but I will bet that there were deaths in every one of these series. You must not know your history well to believe that F1 is all about safety. Please read this article about the death of Ronnie Peterson at Monza in 1978. http://www.atlasf1.com/2000/ita/preview/peterson.html Another dark day in racing, Mario Andretti finally wins the F1 championship but loses friend and teammate Peterson. The lack of safety and poor respsonse from the safety teams here was appalling. This was nothing new in F1, and Jackie Sewart and many other drivers had been fighting for safer tracks, cars, and rules for years. To say that the F1 drivers of the sixties were not brave, heroic, or "real" drivers because "they raced knowing death was a real possibility" is just ludicrous!!! According to you, all race drivers from the past who helped to build this sport to what it is today "were simply foolish people who didn't value their lives very much." What kind of crap is this?!?!? I guess Juan Manuel Fangio, Mario Andretti, AJ Foyt, Richard Petty, Jackie Stewart, Emmerson Fittapaldi, Al Unser, Bobby Unser, Alberto Ascari, Aryton Senna, Alain Prost, Graham Hill, David Pearson, Gilles Villeneuve, Jody Scheckter, Dan Gurney, Jochen Rindt , Stirling Moss , Ray Harroun, Wilbur Shaw, Bill Vukovich, Rick Mears, Jim Clark, Johnny Rutherford, Nigel Mansell, Niki Lauda, and Nelson Piquet were all simply foolish people! Not pioneers of motorsport? Without these heroes(and hundreds more that I failed to mention) we would have no motorsport! Your lack of reasoning here boggles the mind!!! Using this logic, the heroes of the NASA space program, war veterans, firemen, poilcemen, emergency rescue workers, and the people who risk their lives in coal mines are all "simply foolish people". Straight from Atlas F1(www.atlasf1.com), here is the list of drivers killed in Formula One since 1950: "Among drivers who participated seriously in Formula One since the modern championship began in 1950, the list of those killed in racing cars looks something like this: Luigi Fagioli was killed in 1952. Felice Bonetto in 1953. Onofre Marimon in 1954. Alberto Ascari in 1955. Louis Rosier in 1956. Eugenio Castellotti and Alfonso de Portago in 1957. Peter Collins, Luigi Musso and Stewart Lewis-Evans in 1958. Jean Behra in 1959. Harry Schell in 1960. Wolfgang von Trips in 1961. Ricardo Rodriguez in 1962. Carel De Beaufort in 1964. Lorenzo Bandini in 1967. Jimmy Clark and Mike Spence in 1968. Lucien Bianchi and Gerhard Mitter in 1969. Jochen Rindt, Bruce McLaren and Piers Courage in 1970. Jo Siffert and Pedro Rodriguez in 1971. Jo Bonnier in 1972. Francois Cevert in 1973. Peter Revson and Silvio Moser in 1974. Mark Donahue in 1975. Tom Pryce in 1977. Ronnie Peterson in 1978. Patrick Depailler in 1980. Gilles Villeneuve and Ricardo Paletti in 1982. Elio de Angelis in 1986. Aryton Senna in 1994. Roland Ratzenberger in 1994. Nicki Lauda was maimed in a fiery crash, Clay Regazzoni was crippled for life, Moss suffered an accident that ended his career and nearly his life." Formula One absolutely does not have a "tremendous safety record". Based on your logic, Formula One should not even exist today because it would have been shut down in the 1950s' when the average was at least one death per year! To stereotype Nascar as all "about beer and crashes" is to show your lack of knowledge of motorsport in general. I've attended all forms of motorsport and was taught to appreciate them all at an early age. To say one form is superior is just showing uninformed prejudice. We are sad when someone dies, because death itself is tragic no matter the cause. People pay tribute because they care and they feel loss. Death and/or the chance of death or serious injury is part of all forms of auto racing. Based on your statements you may want to look into relocating to Switzerland where all forms of motorsport have been banned since 1955. I wish all forms of auto racing were 100% safe. If they were, we would probably all compete in them, instead of playing around with our computers and "toy" steering wheels thinking we are all high and mighty. However, it is not a safe sport. Neither are sports like mountain climbing, sky diving, kayaking, surfing, skiiing, X-treme sports, and to some extent hockey, rugby and football.(just to name a few). I sincerely hope that Nascar gets its act togther and makes some serious changes, but your arguements and accusations are just plain wrong. Normally, I would have just ignored a post like this assuming it was a troll. However, I have been around r.a.s for a long time, and I believe I have seen you make quality contributions to this group. I hope this was just a misstep on your part brought on by the difficult feelings we as racing fans always experience after the death of one of our heroes. It makes you feel guilty, it makes you feel sad, it makes you feel angry, it makes you feel like giving it up. I do not know what the answer is for you, but I honestly feel you owe this group an apology if you want to maintain any respect here. You are entitled to your opinion, true, but I am trying to give you the benefit of the doubt. If this is in fact your honest opinion, then I will use your own words to sum it up, "Pathetic". Don Chapman ---- David's Original Post-------------------------------------- David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:DPHk6.464$[email hidden]... > I find it really ridiculous that people are acting as if the death of a > NASCAR driver is a tragedy. > > You knew it was going to happen, and so did I. It happens almost everyyear. > Three times last year alone. When you support an activity that you knowwill > result in the death of someone, then it's not a tragedy. It's simply > disgusting. > > I keep hearing the phrase, "Death is a part of auto racing, and these > drivers understand that but want to do it anyway." Bullshit. It isn't apart > of all types of auto racing. Just NASCAR. Formula 1 hasn't had a driverdie

Quoted text (7 lines)

> since 1994. Before that it was 1982. NASCAR is about beer and crashes. > Safety is a science in F1, and their record proves it. They have the top > experts in the world in charge of the safety of it's drivers. NASCAR is a > joke and the modern equivalent of the galdiator races. > > If you support NASCAR, then you support the INEVITABLE death of it's > drivers. How the hell are you then sad when one dies? Turns my stomach

when > I read or see the melodramatic tributes to a fan favorite. I LOVE F1, butif > the drivers were dying I'd say close it down right now. I have said onthis > newsgroup before that I didn't think the F1 drivers of the '60's asmodeled > in GPL were brave, heroic or "real" drivers because they raced knowingdeath > was a real possibility. I think they were simply foolish people who didn't > value their lives very much. > > There is NO reason why drivers have to die in NASCAR. It's simply a POORLY > run, bush league type of auto racing with fans that apparently don't TRULY > care about the safety of it's drivers. It's an embarrassment. Driversstill > have the choice of wearing open-faced helmets? Drivers have the choice to > wear a neck brace that obviously could have saved the lives of previousdead > drivers? > > If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excusefor > NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > Shut it down or just count the races until the next dead driver is pulled > from his car. Then the people who are in charge of NASCAR, and it's fanscan > once again pay tribute to them. > > Pathetic. > > David G Fisher

>Let me know the next time you see 3 or more F1 cars going "door to door" for >lap after lap. And let me know the next time you see a Winston Cup Car going through Eau Rouge at 180mph... >Hell, let me know the next time the race finishes where the >second place driver can actually see the winner as he takes the checkered >flag.Hell, let me know the next time a race finishes without the pack being artificially closed up every few laps :-) -- Cheers! Graeme Nash

> That, and none of us know the statistics on F3000 and other developmental > series in Europe. I doubt their record has been perfect. > > - > Alan There's a huge difference, F3000 has hardly any tv coverage, therefore it has no money, whereas Nascar has all the money in the world to spend on safety if the will was there. And there's no way that 4 drivers have died in the last 13 months in F3000. Show me the evidence that any european racing league has a record as bad as Nascar. Anyway, it's not a US-versus-europe issue, since F1 is global (including the US), and there are racing league in thes US way safer than Nascar.

Personally, I think anyone who puts their middle initial in their signature is opinionated and rarely has anything interesting to say. Yours, Colin J Harris.

David, as a formula 1 fan, I find it amazing that you are trotting out the crap that you are. Formula 1 is about building the best car, any way you can within a curtian set of rules and the best car will win. Nascar is about building a car which is equal to everyone elses and the best driver will win. The end result is apples and oranges. Safe racing is always boring and close racing is always dangerous. If F1 changed the rules back to huge slicks, no wings and steel brakes, the racing would become exciting and we could have 2 or 3 cars abreast into chicanes, and guess what? There would be lots of crashes and people would get killed. Now, If Nascar put skinney tyres and huge wings and carbon brakes onto there cars, there would be no more drafting, no more 2 or 3 abreast, no more close racing and a much safer sport, BUT is that what everyone want's? NO. The drivers and fans want exciting racing and the price for that is ...someone will crash and someone might get hurt or even killed, but race drivers, like all drivers think, "ok, maybe 1 or 2 drivers might get killed over the next 5 to 8 years, but it wont be me, I am careful, and smart and a brilliant driver, and anyway my car is pretty safe and I will be ok. After all it is my job, and there much less safe jobs than mine. ie. NYC cabbie, soldier, airman" etc :-) In the old days of exciting F1, (60's), it was said that if you raced for 5 seasions, you had a 1 in 3 chance of being killed. Now both F1 and Nascar are much safer than that. Sometimes a crash will happen and something bad may happen, but it not because no one cares. F1 has had millions of dollars poured into safety because it is huge business and has been for a long time. Nascar is only just becoming widely accepted and it will change, It will get safer, but will it get better? I think not. Too much safety and little risk will turn Nascar into an F1 lookalike and the fans and drivers, just maywell return to their roots... SPRINTCARS ON A DIRT TRACK. Dangerous?, sure, but worth the risk? Absolutely! russell Ps, as an outsider (Australian) Most of this crap seems to be based on racisim. The northerners are a bunch of stuck-up poofters, and the southerners are a bunch of uneducated rednecks. When is America gonna grow up? We are all human and we all have the same rights to live our lives the way we choose. Work related deaths are extrtremely high, but for example, do we hear, "one the this towns best mechanics died today when a car fell on him, All Car Workshops Should Be Shut Down." Again,.......I THINK NOT. "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:yr3l6.3257$[email hidden]... > Barton always has a lot to say to everybody (I don't mean that he needsto > learn how to edit, although that would help too), but I learned long agoto

Quoted text (11 lines)

> ignore him. > > NASCAR fans can continue to make up statistics to try to defend the sorry > state of their motor sport, but the facts are that F1 has a much more > advanced way of handling driver safety than NASCAR. F1 is cutting edge. F1 > has a more advanced way of handling almost everything involved in their > series compared to NASCAR. They seek out the world's experts on car and > track safety. They spend millions researching safety. F1 has a 100+ member > emergency medical crew that travels to each race. F1 has a board of safety > that deals (surprise) solely with safety issues. F1 inspects each track > itself, instead of leaving it up to the track owners as in NASCAR.

Extremely > high high standards must be met or there is no race. > > The above is just general information. Anyone who wants to do some serious > research into NASCAR and F1 safety is free to do so. They will be amazedto > see how much of a difference there is between the two series. They will > also find out the real reasons why four have died in NASCAR recently, and > none in F1 in seven years. They will find out that F1 will not toleratethe > sh*t that's happened in NASCAR this past year. They will find out thatfans

Quoted text (15 lines)

> of F1 wouldn't tolerate the sh*t that's happening in NASCAR. They will > understand why, "Death is a part of racing" is such a bullsh*t line, and > they'll realize what a bush league sport NASCAR is. > > David G Fisher > > > "Alan Conceicao" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Barton: What do you think the chances are that he'll respond? :) > > > > -thinks its one of the best posts he's ever read- > > Alan > > > > >Geeze, David God, the next thing you know you'll be asking the FIA,

ACO,

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > >SCCA, and every <snip all great material> > > > > > > > > Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: > > "The Last American Hero" > > R.I.P. >

On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 07:44:30 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >NASCAR fans can continue to make up statistics to try to defend the sorry >state of their motor sport... Since I've been posting "made up" statistics, I guess I should reply. It will disappoint David, but I'm not really a NASCAR fan. Sure, I "like" NASCAR, but my preference is for open wheel or sports car racing on road courses. NASCAR isn't perfect, and it's not my favorite, but I can appreciate the series and the people in it. Here in America, it's hard to be a race fan and ignore NASCAR, though David has done remarkably well. I live a few hundred miles north of David, so I guess I should be even more of an elitist, redneck-bashing snob than he is, but I'm not. The thing about David's inital post that bothered me was his over-the-top hyperbole and total lack of reasoning. "NASCAR needs to study and improve safety." Well, duh, David. If you had said that, you would have had all two or three replying posters agreeing with you. But no, that's not your style. Why do a job with a scalpel when you can use a chainsaw, eh? In comparing the safety of F1 and NASCAR, I'll agree that F1 has better proceedures and I suspect F1 is slightly safer (mostly for the much larger amount of money thrown at it). What I bristle at is David's assertion that, on a scale of 1 to 10, F1 safety is an 11 and NASCAR safety is a -87 or so. That's just plain nonsense. And he supports that contention with scanty and selective data that compares the unsafest period of NASCAR in memory (when was the last time 4 NASCAR drivers died on the track in 9 months, the '60s?!?) with one of the safest periods in F1 history. Further, he compares time periods and series that, when looked at as deaths per man-mile, are *statistically equal*! Even that does not knock him from his groove, though. In conclusion, David, congrats on a job well-done. Some 150 posts generated in 24 hours. You are indeed the King of Trolls and I bestow upon you the Official Order of the Hook, Line, and Sinker. And for the rest of us, it will save us a lot of time in the future, knowing we can ignore whatever drivel you may post, knowing that we aren't missing anything worth reading. "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 06:27:50 GMT, Alan Orton <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (15 lines)

>I agree having more drivers will make it more dangerous and increase the >odds of something going wrong. Or if the races are longer maybe it will >increase the danger due to fatigue but I'm still sticking to my story >that the longer the season it doesn't become more "dangerous" unless >fatigue is a issue but it just increases the odds of something >happening. The last race is just as "dangerous" as the first, danger is >a constant varible. > >But I understand what you are saying, I think. The longer the season the >greater the chances of something happening but is that increasing the >danger or the odds? > >Maybe I just don't understand exactly what you mean, I don't know. Maybe >we are talking about the same thing but on different wavelenghts. I'm >not sure.

I think that's true (different wavelengths). I can understand and find some agreement with your first paragraph. The problem is, how do we assess that "hidden" danger level in a single race? Or even better, for a given participant? ("What are the odds my number comes up today?") The hidden danger level may be relatively constant from race to race, although the observable results (driver fatalities) vary widely. You take a number of races, and average the observable results to get some idea of the average hidden danger level. If you are going to compare two different series, you should compare an equal number of races, with an equal mileage, with an equal number of participants (to get to the individual risk). Unfortunately, the real-world data doesn't allow that. That's why I suggest deaths per man-mile to remove those variables from the mix. >> (I know David's not even listening, but I think Alan and I can >> actually have a conversation here, so bear with me...) > >Hehe. Sad but true. Start a fire and run away... >To be honest I don't know what is more dangerous and I don't really >care. I just like to see racing organizations coming out with new >technology be it performance or safety or anything else new. I don't really know which is safer either, but I reject David's wholesale assertion that NASCAR safety is grossly inferior to F1 (and his "reasoning" behind it).

Quoted text (13 lines)

>> That's why I contend that deaths per man-miles is a more relevant >> measure of safety than comparing the number of deaths over an >> arbitrary calendar period in two radically-different-sized series. >> > >You could use that method to get a rough idea I guess and it would >"level the playing field" but there are still a lot of varibles. Was it >a safety issue that caused the death or was it something else such as a >health issue or driver error or poor judgement or maybe mechanical >breakage like Shummey's at Monaco which could of tossed him in for a big >drink out of the tunnel. There are some wrecks that NASA couldn't even >help prevent a death. That kind of death doesn't make it unsafe, that is >just bad luck. Or do you consider every death a knock against safety?

There are a ton of other variables, I agree. That's why I started off my first post talking about comparing apples to oranges (my methodology) and apples to fruitcakes (David's "stats"). (Why, what did you think I was refering to? :) The (thankfully) infrequent occurance of driver deaths gives us little data to work with. Some variables (ovals versus road courses, 3400 pound sedans versus open cockpit/open wheelers) you want to include to distinguish the two series from each other and determine relative safety of each. Others such as those you mentioned are the sort of intangibles that are hard to isolate. >My brain is starting to hurt,hehe. Not even sure what this debate is >about,hehe. getting late. Yeah, this "agreeing stuff" is boring, let's flame DGF some more... :) "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

Barton Brown wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > Man, I gotta hand it to you: this is the single most incredible piece of > flamebait I've seen in this forum in five or so years of dropping in > here -- true Troll-Hall-of-Fame-quality nonsense. I award you the > Fran�ois Menard Memorial Golden Turd with dingleberry clusters and > undigested peanuts. Bravo! U R awesome! > > Bart "I'm not worthy" Brown

Give the man a Cigar..... Hey Bart, nice to hear from you again :-) Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "Team Mirage" http://members.prestige.net/bttw/teammirage/ "The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/ * Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way * "Spamkiller" http://www.spamkiller.com

Tim O wrote:

Quoted text (21 lines)

> > On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 00:42:03 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > [snip] > > >I used to race a motocross bike. 100mph on unfamiliar terrain, with trees 10 > >feet to either side of me. No rollcage. I guess my skin was my rollcage. > >Launched myself high in the air, etc. People used to tell me how brave I was > >to do that. I told them there was no bravery involved at all. I was simply > >having foolish fun. Bravery is forcing yourself to do something for the > >greater good, even when you're afraid to do so. I wanted to ride the cycle. > >Race car drivers want to race. They aren't forced to. I realized what I was > >doing was foolish because IMO, all a person is doing when they die while > >"playing" is avoiding a lifetime of responsibilities, and giving up the > >opportunity to counter all the bad there is in this world with their own > >good. > > Hey, what kind of bike did you have? What series did you race in? > > Tim

http://www.pocketbike.com/images/mypolini.gif

Ed Solheim wrote:

Quoted text (19 lines)

> > David G Fisher wrote: > > For the umpteenth time, there have been four driver deaths in NASCAR in > the > > past nine months. No driver deaths in F1 since 1994. > > Lets do some math: > > F1: 16 [17] races each season with 20 [22] drivers in each race... > = 374 "drivers" start a race thruout a season... (based on 17 races a > season) > > NASCAR: 39 races each season with an average of 40 drivers in each race... > = 1560 "drivers" start a race thruout a season.... > > Over four times as many drivers start a NASCAR race compared to F1 each > season... so for every NASCAR season you can count 4 years of F1. > > ed_

Ed, it's a shame that DGF won't have 'the time' to answer you...but i'm sure he'll try. Oh well. Cheers Gerry

Jeff Vincent wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 00:42:04 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >I said there were no driver deaths since 1994. No errors there. > > That's right. In David's elitist little world, only F1 drivers > count. Little people like corner marshalls or beer-drinking > NASCAR-fan trash (which, of course, describes *all* NASCAR fans) don't > count. Acknowledging a death caused by his precious F1 drivers > ("where safety is a science!") might tarnish their superior safety > record.

Right on the money Jeff. If those F1 drivers felt a little less safe, then that marshall would prolly be alive today. The safer you feel the more risks you take. Lets take the drivers out of the cars and do it all by remote. VROC Monza T1 anyone? Cheers Gerry

Barton Brown wrote: > You can pick up your F.M.M. Golden Turd award at Frankie Menard's > chateau in suburban Montreal at your convenience... And maybe DGF could place his trophy in a glass case in his own convenience, and then gaze lovingly at it as he 'drops the kids off at the pool', 'lays a cable', 'rides the chocolate express bound for the blue lagoon', or just plain talks, which i'm sure he does from the same rusty bullet hole he shits from :). Cheers Gerry

Joe62 wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >You knew it was going to happen, and so did I. > > So did the drivers in the race. Who the hell are you to tell them what > risks they should be allowed to take?

HE is David God Fisher, and he's always right, so there!;) Cheers Gerry

Let me know the next time F1 is at Talladega going through the banked turns at 180mps side by side, nose to tail. Oh that's right.. with the traction control and all the other 'drivers aids' (In NASCAR - Driver's aid is definined as POWER STEERING <VBG>) and collision detection and speed control systems, that can't happen =P Watch the next race that is not at a super speedway and you wont see it ;) -- Scott B. Husted PA-Scott The Pits: PowerSims Magazine (http://www.theuspits.com) Graeme Nash <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > >Let me know the next time you see 3 or more F1 cars going "door to door" for > >lap after lap. > And let me know the next time you see a Winston Cup Car going through > Eau Rouge at 180mph... > > >Hell, let me know the next time the race finishes where the > >second place driver can actually see the winner as he takes the checkered > >flag. > Hell, let me know the next time a race finishes without the pack being > artificially closed up every few laps :-) > > -- > Cheers! > Graeme Nash

David G Fisher wrote: > > Barton always has a lot to say to everybody (I don't mean that he needs to > learn how to edit, although that would help too), but I learned long ago to > ignore him. And the facts. "but the facts [sic] are that F1 has a much more advanced way of handling driver safety than NASCAR. " And your proof of that is? And please don't repeat your mantra of "four have died in NASCAR recently, and none in F1 in seven years" as "proof" - it's purely anecdotal and a meaningless generalization, like everything else you've decanted. That same kind of generalization could have been used in any one of many racing seasons in the '50s or '60s (Sommer, Ascari, Collins, Schell, Musso, Fagioli, Castelotti, von Trips, deBeaufort, Lewis-Evans, Stacey, Bristow, Behra, Ricardo Rodriguez, Schlesser, Clark, Spence, Bandini) or '70s (Courage, Williamson, Siffert, Cevert, Pryce, Donohue, Revson, Peterson, Pace) or '80s (Depailler, Villeneuve, deAngelis, Paletti) to prove just the opposite. "F1 is cutting edge. F1 has a more advanced way of handling almost everything involved in their series compared to NASCAR." And your proof of that is? "They seek out the world's experts on car and track safety. They spend millions researching safety. F1 has a 100+ member emergency medical crew that travels to each race. F1 has a board of safety that deals (surprise) solely with safety issues. " As has, and does, NASCAR -- though I daresay their emergency medical crew at any one race may not be "100+" -- neither is it "100+" at any one race in F1. And no offense to you furrin' folk, but I'd feel a helluva lot more confident getting dragged to a US hospital than one in, say, Portugal or Malaysia...or Italy, for that matter. Prof. Sid Watkins has a wonderful medical staff, but his on-site care unit does not deal with major trauma. You'd think Austria in the mid-1970s would have had splendid medical care, but Mark Donohue whacked his head on a billboard support in his Penske, was looked at by the on-hand medical folk, and sent on his merry way with with a throbbing headache. A few hours later he was dead. "F1 inspects each track itself, instead of leaving it up to the track owners as in NASCAR." Bzzzztttt! Wrong! "Extremely high high standards must be met or there is no race." Like Imola, for instance, or Monaco? Sorry DGF -- your opinion, godlike though you may conceive it to be, does not equate to factual evidence anywhere but in your own mind. Your characterization of the drivers, owners, track owners, sanctioning body, and fans of NASCAR lumps all of them into one big all-encompassing generalization: lazy, stupid, uncaring, unprincipled, and greedy. That's not just wrong, it's moronic. I'm not saying NASCAR has no problems -- I'd say they've found themselves in almost exactly the same situation F1 did 7 years ago, after Senna and Ratzenberger -- and damned near Barrichello -- perished at Imola, and then BOOM! ... two weeks later, Wendlinger takes an incredible thump at Monaco. All the same things were being said then about F1 that you're blithering now about NASCAR. The unfortunate deaths of Scott Brayton and Jeff Krosnoff engendered similar hysterical reactions for Indycar racing (and isn't it an interesting comment on the state of American news that the only time the major networks even deign to mention motorsports is when somebody dies? -- it has ever been thus, on this side of the pond). Motor racing is dangerous. It has always been dangerous. Like it or not, if there were no danger involved, it would lose much of its appeal. If -- God forbid -- in the 2001 F1 season, 1 or 2 or 4 or 5 drivers, pit crew, or spectators lose their lives, your entire generalized, anecdotal house of cards would collapse. And don't for a moment think it can't happen in today's F1: there were many accidents last year that could have easily gone the wrong way. It's not very many years since Hakkinen nearly lost his life, Jos Verstappen... well, I could go on (and I do). At the Daytona 500 this year, NASCAR ran out of luck, like F1 did at Imola in 1994. There is no doubt that barrier technology, head restraints, retention of suspension members (something the FIA was supposed to have addressed after Senna's freak accident, but recent crashes in F1 show that the forces involved defeat all efforts at retention), and a myriad other safety issues need to be constantly reappraised in all forms of motorsport. Your singling out of NASCAR simply shows your bias, and your misinformation about the way NASCAR does things shows that you have no intention to inform your own bias; your only intention is to troll, troll, troll -- as you have on many previous occasions. I'd like to say "think about it", but it would be like asking a puff adder to play badminton -- you don't possess the necessary equipment. BB

Don Chapman wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > I did not want you to apologize for criticizing Nascar. It deserves to be > scrutinized right now. What I was hoping you would apologize for is the > crass, rude, insensitive, prejudiced and ultimately sick way you went about > it. In your post you demeaned Nascar fans, you demeaned Nascar drivers > living and fallen, and you even managed to demean the early pioneers of all > forms of motorsport. In my opinion, you demeaned motorsports fans in > general.

Indeed, I found his words regarding the early pioneers very upsetting and disrespectful. So for that reason I *sadly* have to place him in my kill file, he's the only one in it btw. Does anyone else feel that he went way too far? Cheers Gerry Ps, there's one name missing from the R.A.S Silent Tribute, any guesses who's?

Awesome article! http://ojr.usc.edu/content/story.cfm?request=540 -- Scott B. Husted PA-Scott The Pits: PowerSims Magazine (http://www.theuspits.com)

In article <vfZk6.2581$[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (11 lines)

>I used to race a motocross bike. 100mph on unfamiliar terrain, with trees 10 >feet to either side of me. No rollcage. I guess my skin was my rollcage. >Launched myself high in the air, etc. People used to tell me how brave I was >to do that. I told them there was no bravery involved at all. I was simply >having foolish fun. Bravery is forcing yourself to do something for the >greater good, even when you're afraid to do so. I wanted to ride the cycle. >Race car drivers want to race. They aren't forced to. I realized what I was >doing was foolish because IMO, all a person is doing when they die while >"playing" is avoiding a lifetime of responsibilities, and giving up the >opportunity to counter all the bad there is in this world with their own >good.

Shit, if everyone avoided things that are dangerous, then we may as well just sit in front of the TV all day. After all, why take a chance? Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL F1 hcp. +28.67...F2 +151.26...F3 hcp. +373.73 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <itYk6.2133$[email hidden]>, "Don Chapman" <[email hidden]> writes: >Sorry, for some reason I thought Marcello was 1992. Brayton was 1996. I stand corrected. Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL F1 hcp. +28.67...F2 +151.26...F3 hcp. +373.73 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Alan Conceicao) writes: >Everyone in this country thinks the same thing about all motorsport. If you >believe otherwise, you're an idiot. I had a friend once tell me that I should >watch F1, because, and I quote, "The crashes are better." > You actually have a friend who thinks that? That's sad(the friend)... Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL F1 hcp. +28.67...F2 +151.26...F3 hcp. +373.73 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <971ctt$u8m$[email hidden]>, "Art McEwen" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>> A.J. Foyt, Mario Andretti, and probably others raced Indycars well into >their >> 50's. Do you have the same feelings about them? >> >Paul Newman was in this year's Daytona 24hours and he's into his 70's, my >dad says you need less sleep as you get older. >

Yeah, I didn't think about Newman until later. There's also another driver near or at 70, but I can't remember which series - IMSA(or whatever replaced it)? Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL F1 hcp. +28.67...F2 +151.26...F3 hcp. +373.73 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

EldredP wrote: > Shit, if everyone avoided things that are dangerous, then we may as well just > sit in front of the TV all day. After all, why take a chance? > You kidding? That tube could blow & put your eyes out!! <g> -- Fester Restrictor plate racing killed Dale Earnhardt.

The two articles linked to in the one you gave below back up much of what I've said. So does Waltrip. I'd like to hear what Waltrip has to say now after Earnhardt's death. ----------------------------- Two drivers are dead and the NASCAR world has moved on, as it often does in the face of injuries or fatalities. That has left everyone guessing -- and worried about their own safety. "It makes me so mad," three-time NASCAR Winston Cup champion Darrell Waltrip said. "We're so busy. They (NASCAR officials) don't have time to ponder anything. "It's just like, `A guy got killed, but it's OK because he was doing what he likes to do.' I mean, give me a break! (It's like) a guy riding down the road and he gets shot in the head by some weirdo. (You don't say) `Well, he was driving down his favorite road.' ... There's no rationale." What drivers want to know is why NASCAR isn't taking the lead. "If you were as concerned about safety as you are parity and who's getting the most downforce, and all those issues, somewhere along the way, we've got to stop and say, `Hey, we're getting those guys hurt over here,' " Waltrip said. " `What's going on?' " David G Fisher "Scott B. Husted" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:HAdl6.2899$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> Awesome article! > > http://ojr.usc.edu/content/story.cfm?request=540 > > -- > Scott B. Husted > PA-Scott > The Pits: PowerSims Magazine (http://www.theuspits.com) > >

According to my newsreader, you posted a reply to me in my thread at 2:15 a.m., and then waited a whopping hour and a half until 3:45 a.m. to start this new thread. Most people do tend to sleep in the middle of the night, although I am probably an elitist for thinking this way, and my facts are all wrong. BTW, I didn't create any mess. When I read something that I honestly feel is ridiculous (as you and some others claimed my post was), I don't waste my time responding. Why do you? David G Fisher "Don Chapman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Ok4l6.2711$[email hidden]... > Since David is no longer responding to the mess he created , and I spentso > much time on this final follow up, I hope you all will forgive the factthat > I have continued this topic by creating a new thread and essentiallyposting > twice. If I offend I apologize, but this guy really hit a nerve.

Don Chapman wrote:

Quoted text (19 lines)

> Straight from Atlas F1(www.atlasf1.com), here is the list of drivers killed > in Formula One since 1950: > > "Among drivers who participated seriously in Formula One since the modern > championship began in 1950, the list of those killed in racing cars looks > something like this: Luigi Fagioli was killed in 1952. Felice Bonetto in > 1953. Onofre Marimon in 1954. Alberto Ascari in 1955. Louis Rosier in 1956. > Eugenio Castellotti and Alfonso de Portago in 1957. Peter Collins, Luigi > Musso and Stewart Lewis-Evans in 1958. Jean Behra in 1959. Harry Schell in > 1960. Wolfgang von Trips in 1961. Ricardo Rodriguez in 1962. Carel De > Beaufort in 1964. Lorenzo Bandini in 1967. Jimmy Clark and Mike Spence in > 1968. Lucien Bianchi and Gerhard Mitter in 1969. Jochen Rindt, Bruce McLaren > and Piers Courage in 1970. Jo Siffert and Pedro Rodriguez in 1971. Jo > Bonnier in 1972. Francois Cevert in 1973. Peter Revson and Silvio Moser in > 1974. Mark Donahue in 1975. Tom Pryce in 1977. Ronnie Peterson in 1978. > Patrick Depailler in 1980. Gilles Villeneuve and Ricardo Paletti in 1982. > Elio de Angelis in 1986. Aryton Senna in 1994. Roland Ratzenberger in 1994. > Nicki Lauda was maimed in a fiery crash, Clay Regazzoni was crippled for > life, Moss suffered an accident that ended his career and nearly his life."

Don, while I agree with almost everything you have said in your very eloquent posts throughout this thread, you should re-read the first part of the first sentence you quote. This is a list of drivers who participated in Formula One who died "racing cars", not necessarily Formula One cars. For example, Jim Clark died racing a Formula Two car at Hockenheim, Bruce McLaren died testing his Can-Am car at Goodwood, Mike Spence died in a sports car race (if I remember correctly), etc. Just trying to set the record straight. Dave Ewing -- ***************************************************** David A. Ewing Xilinx Boulder [email hidden] *****************************************************

Yeah, his concern for NASCAR to start looking at safety. The one item that was lost in all your other total BS of a post. -- Scott B. Husted "PA-Scott" ICQ# 4395450

Goy Larsen wrote: > > Give the man a Cigar..... > > Hey Bart, nice to hear from you again :-) Likewise, mon ami mate! And make that cigar a Montecristo, please... BB

Yeah, and his other point was the total bullshit way of thinking that dying while racing is ok because he was doing what he likes to do, and that's it's just part of the sport. Waltrip said this, "It's just like, `A guy got killed, but it's OK because he was doing what he likes to do.' I mean, give me a break! (It's like) a guy riding down the road and he gets shot in the head by some weirdo. (You don't say) `Well, he was driving down his favorite road.' ... There's no rationale." I said this, "I keep hearing the phrase, "Death is a part of auto racing, and these drivers understand that but want to do it anyway." Bullshit. It isn't a part of all types of auto racing." That very prevalent line of thinking among NASCAR fans and the people who run NASCAR is EXACTLY why I'm so critical of it. Your bullshit replies showed you have no ability to comprehend. Understand now, kids? David G Fisher "Scott B. Husted" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Yeah, his concern for NASCAR to start looking at safety. The one itemthat

Quoted text (9 lines)

> was lost in all your other total BS of a post. > > -- > Scott B. Husted > "PA-Scott" > ICQ# 4395450 > > >

You have repeatedly stated you could care less for Nascar, so why do you even give a flying flip? I could care less about F1, and couldn't even begin to quote any statistics for it, including deaths - cause I don't watch it or know the drivers. I would be saddened to hear of anyone dying in it, but I sure as hell ain't going to try and start telling F1 fans how their sport is dangerous and ill-run. You have no interest in Nascar - give it up, go watch the pansies :) -- Don Burnette "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:yr3l6.3257$[email hidden]... > Barton always has a lot to say to everybody (I don't mean that he needs to > learn how to edit, although that would help too), but I learned long ago to > ignore him. > > NASCAR fans can continue to make up statistics to try to defend the sorry > state of their motor sport, but the facts are that F1 has a much more > advanced way of handling driver safety than NASCAR. F1 is cutting edge. F1 > has a more advanced way of handling almost everything involved in their > series compared to NASCAR. They seek out the world's experts on car and > track safety. They spend millions researching safety. F1 has a 100+ member > emergency medical crew that travels to each race. F1 has a board of safety > that deals (surprise) solely with safety issues. F1 inspects each track > itself, instead of leaving it up to the track owners as in NASCAR. Extremely > high high standards must be met or there is no race. > > The above is just general information. Anyone who wants to do some serious > research into NASCAR and F1 safety is free to do so. They will be amazed to > see how much of a difference there is between the two series. They will > also find out the real reasons why four have died in NASCAR recently, and > none in F1 in seven years. They will find out that F1 will not tolerate the > sh*t that's happened in NASCAR this past year. They will find out that fans > of F1 wouldn't tolerate the sh*t that's happening in NASCAR. They will > understand why, "Death is a part of racing" is such a bullsh*t line, and > they'll realize what a bush league sport NASCAR is. > > David G Fisher > > > "Alan Conceicao" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Barton: What do you think the chances are that he'll respond? :) > > > > -thinks its one of the best posts he's ever read- > > Alan > > > > >Geeze, David God, the next thing you know you'll be asking the FIA, ACO, > > >SCCA, and every <snip all great material> > > > > > > > > Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: > > "The Last American Hero" > > R.I.P. >

Lol, those pansies would pee their pants if they had to race like that. -- Don Burnette "Scott B. Husted" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:PWcl6.2885$[email hidden]... > Let me know the next time F1 is at Talladega going through the banked turns > at 180mps side by side, nose to tail. Oh that's right.. with the traction > control and all the other 'drivers aids' (In NASCAR - Driver's aid is > definined as POWER STEERING <VBG>) and collision detection and speed control > systems, that can't happen =P > > Watch the next race that is not at a super speedway and you wont see it ;) > > -- > Scott B. Husted > PA-Scott > The Pits: PowerSims Magazine (http://www.theuspits.com) > > Graeme Nash <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > > >Let me know the next time you see 3 or more F1 cars going "door to door" > for > > >lap after lap. > > And let me know the next time you see a Winston Cup Car going through > > Eau Rouge at 180mph... > > > > >Hell, let me know the next time the race finishes where the > > >second place driver can actually see the winner as he takes the checkered > > >flag. > > Hell, let me know the next time a race finishes without the pack being > > artificially closed up every few laps :-) > > > > -- > > Cheers! > > Graeme Nash > >

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:PVhl6.4977$[email hidden]... a lot of bubble snipped > Understand now, kids? > > David G Fisher Umm, lemme think - NOPE. Go back to your eutopia with F1, since it is so perfect. Don Burnette

Quoted text (17 lines)

> > > > "Scott B. Husted" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Yeah, his concern for NASCAR to start looking at safety. The one item > that > > > was lost in all your other total BS of a post. > > > > -- > > Scott B. Husted > > "PA-Scott" > > ICQ# 4395450 > > > > > > >

On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 21:06:48 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >The two articles linked to in the one you gave below back up much of what >I've said. So does Waltrip. I'd like to hear what Waltrip has to say now >after Earnhardt's death. Where's the part that says to shut down NASCAR? Where's the part that says NASCAR safety practices are grossly inferior to practices in other series? Where's the part that says NASCAR fans are low-life, beer-swilling, blood-thirsty trailer trash? Are you on the same planet, David? "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 17:50:23 +0000, Gerry Aitken <[email hidden]> wrote: >Right on the money Jeff. If those F1 drivers felt a little less safe, >then that marshall would prolly be alive today. > >The safer you feel the more risks you take. Lets take the drivers out of >the cars and do it all by remote. VROC Monza T1 anyone? And it isn't just us sim-weenies that believe that. Great drivers of the past like Stirling Moss have stated that the higher level of safety in today's cars tends to lead to more aggressive driving and more incidents since the consequences are rarely as dire as in the past. Sound like Senna, Schumacher, or maybe even Villenueve? Or Daytona or Talladega? "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

>I said this, "I keep hearing the phrase, "Death is a part of auto racing, >and these >drivers understand that but want to do it anyway." Bullshit. It isn't a part >of all types of auto racing." So are you saying that in F1, there is zero potential of a fatal accident? -- Cheers! Graeme Nash

On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:46:39 +0000, Gerry Aitken <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (15 lines)

>Don Chapman wrote: >> >> I did not want you to apologize for criticizing Nascar. It deserves to be >> scrutinized right now. What I was hoping you would apologize for is the >> crass, rude, insensitive, prejudiced and ultimately sick way you went about >> it. In your post you demeaned Nascar fans, you demeaned Nascar drivers >> living and fallen, and you even managed to demean the early pioneers of all >> forms of motorsport. In my opinion, you demeaned motorsports fans in >> general. > >Indeed, I found his words regarding the early pioneers very upsetting >and disrespectful. So for that reason I *sadly* have to place him in my >kill file, he's the only one in it btw. > >Does anyone else feel that he went way too far?

Is there anyone who *doesn't* think so? "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

>I said this, "I keep hearing the phrase, "Death is a part of auto racing, >and these >drivers understand that but want to do it anyway." Bullshit. It isn't a part >of all types of auto racing." Its not in all types of auto racing? Well, I guess that explains Button adn the recent aquisition of Sauber.... :) Seriously though, to stoop to this level to defend your flamebait is truly pathetic. >That very prevalent line of thinking among NASCAR fans and the people who >run NASCAR is EXACTLY why I'm so critical of it. But its the truth. Do you honestly believe that NO F1 drivers will die again, EVER? And its not 4, its 2....Winston Cup is the only thing that should be compared to F1, and you know it...again. - Alan Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:46:39 +0000, Gerry Aitken <[email hidden]> wrote: >Indeed, I found his words regarding the early pioneers very upsetting >and disrespectful. So for that reason I *sadly* have to place him in my >kill file, he's the only one in it btw. > >Does anyone else feel that he went way too far? Does anyone care who do you place into your killfile? >Ps, there's one name missing from the R.A.S Silent Tribute, any guesses >who's? Bill Clinton? Jan

> Where's the part that says NASCAR safety practices are grossly >inferior to practices in other series? > Actually, and I hate to agree, DW DID say something to this regard. "In F1, they have a team of experts go in and say, 'We want a chicane herem tire barriers there.' When we complain, they say 'Shut up and drive.' " Still doesn't say anything about beer-swilling fans, shutting down the sport, or calling the cars "ugly and antiquated". - Alan Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

No. David G Fisher "Graeme Nash" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > >I said this, "I keep hearing the phrase, "Death is a part of auto racing, > >and these > >drivers understand that but want to do it anyway." Bullshit. It isn't apart

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >of all types of auto racing." > > So are you saying that in F1, there is zero potential of a fatal > accident? > > -- > Cheers! > Graeme Nash

>There's a huge difference, F3000 has hardly any tv coverage, therefore it >has no money, <snip> Again, F3000 and F1 combined do not equal NASCAR. I also doubt four people died in it least year; no single racing series has had 4 deaths since possibly the 60s or 50s. - Alan Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

GREAT REPLY David! You made SO many valid points! ::rolls eyes:: - Alan Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

>> So are you saying that in F1, there is zero potential of a fatal >> accident? >No. So if F1 has 2 deaths in 9 months, its bad luck? At this pace, that hole you're digging will hit China in a week. - Alan Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

That hour and a half was spent reading through all the threads to your original post and trying to make sense of all the responses. There had been so much activity there since I first started writing, I wanted to make sure I did not miss something important. I found some mistakes in my 2:15 reply and also re-organized and re-worded it. I realized it would be buried where it was and that you were no longer responding to the threads of that original post. I arrogantly thought it was worth posting on its own. I apologize for that. As for why I was awake in the middle of the night; I have had spinal arthritis for the last 15 years and am unable to sleep for more than 2-3 hours at a time. This makes for bad sleeping habits, but it does allow for more sim racing. :) To be honest, I do not know why I spent so much time responding. I think originally I stated it was because I had appreciated your contributions to this newsgroup before, and I just wanted to figure out your reasons behind such a mean spirited post. Sadly, none of this seemed to help, and a search of dejanews proved that I think I was wrong about your past contributions to r.a.s to begin with. You neglected to answer to most of the contradictions to your reasoning that I pointed out. I think I answered every question you posed back to me, and even agreed with you that there are some serious problems that Nascar needs to address. But as I pointed out multiple times to you, that is not what I was disputing or had a problem with. I had a problem with the poor way you went about it and the flawed reasoning and facts that you presented. When I presented you with questions regarding actual facts(like the fact that no F1 driver has ever raced with a HANS device to this day), you neglected to even respond. I was hoping for at least some intelligent debate. I will agree with you that it was a complete waste of my time to have ever responded to your posts in the first place. David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8qfl6.4438$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> According to my newsreader, you posted a reply to me in my thread at 2:15 > a.m., and then waited a whopping hour and a half until 3:45 a.m. to start > this new thread. Most people do tend to sleep in the middle of the night, > although I am probably an elitist for thinking this way, and my facts are > all wrong. > > BTW, I didn't create any mess. When I read something that I honestly feel

is

Quoted text (17 lines)

> ridiculous (as you and some others claimed my post was), I don't waste my > time responding. Why do you? > > David G Fisher > > > "Don Chapman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:Ok4l6.2711$[email hidden]... > > Since David is no longer responding to the mess he created , and I spent > so > > much time on this final follow up, I hope you all will forgive the fact > that > > I have continued this topic by creating a new thread and essentially > posting > > twice. If I offend I apologize, but this guy really hit a nerve. > >

[email hidden] (Jeff Vincent) wrote: >Even that does not knock him from his groove, >though. Good post. I feel bad for David, actually. He used to be such a reasonable poster. But ever since he got the "GPL isn't the end all and be all" bee in his bonnet he's become increasingly combative and stubborn around here. Maybe when you're that freaking wrong for so long (if we're facing facts for the moment, GPL IS still the best racing simulation) it colors your opinions about the whole genre. Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment

On 23 Feb 2001 02:14:33 GMT, [email hidden] (Alan Conceicao) wrote: > ::rolls eyes:: Why do AOL users make it so hard *not* to develop prejudices? ;-)

Well thanks for caring Joe, but it's really not necessary for you to feel too bad for me. I have a very good life, and I made it this way by avoiding the way of thinking of "the average guy". As long as the fanatics of anything (NASCAR and GPL included) have contrary opinions to mine, than I know I must be on the right track. Not one of the people's who's opinions I respect on this newsgroup appeared in this NASCAR thread with anything negative to say to me. The people's who's opinions I respect seem to respect mine (sim developers seem to as well, because the offers to test keep coming year after year). They and I may not be in the majority (here at r.a.s.), but then again I doubt any of us would feel comfortable in that position. Average is bad. David G Fisher "Joe62" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> [email hidden] (Jeff Vincent) wrote: > > >Even that does not knock him from his groove, > >though. > > Good post. I feel bad for David, actually. He used to be such a > reasonable poster. But ever since he got the "GPL isn't the end all > and be all" bee in his bonnet he's become increasingly combative and > stubborn around here. Maybe when you're that freaking wrong for so > long (if we're facing facts for the moment, GPL IS still the best > racing simulation) it colors your opinions about the whole genre. > > Joe McGinn > _____________________ > Radical Entertainment

Jan Loebzien wrote: > Bill Clinton? Do you live under the same stone as DGF?

On Fri, 23 Feb 2001 07:45:36 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>As long as the fanatics of anything (NASCAR and GPL included) have contrary >opinions to mine, than I know I must be on the right track. > >Not one of the people's who's opinions I respect on this newsgroup appeared >in this NASCAR thread with anything negative to say to me. >The people's who's opinions I respect seem to respect mine (sim developers seem to as >well, because the offers to test keep coming year after year). They and I >may not be in the majority (here at r.a.s.), but then again I doubt any of >us would feel comfortable in that position.

This is one of the longest posts I ever saw on RAS, and allmost everybody, let's say it nicely, disagrees with you. And now you state people 'who's opinion you respect' seem to agree with you because they don't post in this thread. You don't 'respect' any of the +/- 140 people that replied to your post. You are even more blind than Derek Smart. Here's a serious advice David: Apologize for your rambling and stop posting this crap while you can, you're making a fool out of yourself. Andre "Michael feels the same way about safety in auto racing as I do. Great minds think alike." - David G Fisher

On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 21:22:12 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >BTW, I didn't create any mess. When I read something that I honestly feel is >ridiculous (as you and some others claimed my post was), I don't waste my >time responding. Why do you? > >David G Fisher Because you actually think that if someone doesn't respond, he automatically agrees with you. From your previous post: > Not one of the people's who's opinions I respect on this newsgroup appeared > in this NASCAR thread with anything negative to say to me. The people's > who's opinions I respect seem to respect mine (sim developers seem to as > well, because the offers to test keep coming year after year). Andre "Michael feels the same way about safety in auto racing as I do. Great minds think alike." - David G Fisher

>No. So what motorsports were you talking about when you said "Death isn't a part of all auto racing?" -- Cheers! Graeme Nash

You're beginning to catch on Don... DGF seems a very reasonnable intelligent person. Someone you could have a civil debate with, but, sadly, in my experience this is just not the case as he just ignores things he can't refute. I have therefore refrained from commenting on this issue, which, apparently, now makes me part of the silent majority who agrees with him. -lol ;-) Jan. =--- Don Chapman wrote... > <snip> > I will agree with you that it was a complete waste of my > time to have ever responded to your posts in the first place.

Only you David.... lol. Jan. =--- David G Fisher wrote...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> <snip> > BTW, I didn't create any mess. When I read something that > I honestly feel is ridiculous (as you and some others > claimed my post was), I don't waste my time responding. > Why do you? > > David G Fisher

In my experience there's only two kinds of opinions DGF respects: his own and those of who he agrees with. The regulars who disagree and haven't commented on this issue restrained themselves because they've come to realise the futility of doing so, IMO. Jan. =--- PS.: Nice sig Andre. lol Andre Warringa wrote...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> <snip> > Because you actually think that if someone doesn't > respond, he automatically agrees with you. > <snip> > Andre > > "Michael feels the same way about safety in auto racing > as I do. Great minds think alike." - David G Fisher

"Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > This is one of the longest posts I ever saw on RAS, and allmost > everybody, let's say it nicely, disagrees with you. Andre disagrees with me. What a surprise. You disagree with every single post I ever make on r.a.s. Did you read the post Andre? I just made it very clear whether or not I hoped or cared if certain types of people agreed with my opinions. "Allmost everybody" is the key phrase. > And now you state people 'who's opinion you respect' seem to agree > with you because they don't post in this thread. That's not what I said at all.

Quoted text (7 lines)

> You don't 'respect' any of the +/- 140 people that replied to your > post. > You are even more blind than Derek Smart. > > Here's a serious advice David: Apologize for your rambling and stop > posting this crap while you can, you're making a fool out of > yourself.

Sorry Andre, but the fools are the NASCAR fans. If you lived in the U.S. you might have a clue as to how they are perceived here by the overwhelming majority of the public. They rank just a bit above the WWF fans. I assure you they got that ranking without any help from me. David G Fisher

"Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 21:22:12 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >BTW, I didn't create any mess. When I read something that I honestly feelis

Quoted text (9 lines)

> >ridiculous (as you and some others claimed my post was), I don't waste my > >time responding. Why do you? > > > >David G Fisher > > Because you actually think that if someone doesn't respond, he > automatically agrees with you. > From your previous post: > > Not one of the people's who's opinions I respect on this newsgroup

appeared > > in this NASCAR thread with anything negative to say to me. Nice try Andre, but you're reaching. I see Jan is backing you up, as usual. David G Fisher Wonders how Andre can play GPL two hours a day, every day, yet still has time to disagree with every post I've ever made.

On Fri, 23 Feb 2001 11:04:40 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Andre disagrees with me. What a surprise. You disagree with every single >post I ever make on r.a.s. You and I have different opinions about sim racing. You like 4x4 Evo and you don't like GPL. I think otherwise. I agreed with your opinions about F1RC though, I don't 'automatically' disagree with you. >Did you read the post Andre? I just made it very >clear whether or not I hoped or cared if certain types of people agreed with >my opinions. "Allmost everybody" is the key phrase. Ah, so you only care for people who agree with your opinions. You start to sound more and more like Derek. Scary. >> And now you state people 'who's opinion you respect' seem to agree >> with you because they don't post in this thread. > >That's not what I said at all. No? "Not one of the people's who's opinions I respect on this newsgroup appeared in this NASCAR thread with anything negative to say to me. The people's who's opinions I respect seem to respect mine (sim developers seem to as well, because the offers to test keep coming year after year)." >> You don't 'respect' any of the +/- 140 people that replied to your >> post. Please answer me on this one David. How come you don't respect these people? Let me repeat again, before you deny saying things like this: "Not one of the people's who's opinions I respect on this newsgroup appeared in this NASCAR thread with anything negative to say to me."

Quoted text (10 lines)

>> Here's a serious advice David: Apologize for your rambling and stop >> posting this crap while you can, you're making a fool out of >> yourself. > >Sorry Andre, but the fools are the NASCAR fans. If you lived in the U.S. you >might have a clue as to how they are perceived here by the overwhelming >majority of the public. They rank just a bit above the WWF fans. I assure >you they got that ranking without any help from me. > >David G Fisher

I don't care about your opinion David, I found your original post respectless and offending, but I chose to ignore it. But saying that you don't respect the people who replied to your nonsense is simply disgusting. Let me guess your answer: a) No reply at all b) "I didn't say that" Andre "Michael feels the same way about safety in auto racing as I do. Great minds think alike." - David G Fisher

On Fri, 23 Feb 2001 11:11:24 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (22 lines)

> >"Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 21:22:12 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> >> wrote: >> >> >BTW, I didn't create any mess. When I read something that I honestly feel >is >> >ridiculous (as you and some others claimed my post was), I don't waste my >> >time responding. Why do you? >> > >> >David G Fisher >> >> Because you actually think that if someone doesn't respond, he >> automatically agrees with you. >> From your previous post: >> > Not one of the people's who's opinions I respect on this newsgroup >appeared >> > in this NASCAR thread with anything negative to say to me. >Nice try Andre, but you're reaching. I see Jan is backing you up, as usual.

As usual, you're avoiding the discussion. Typical. Cheap. >David G Fisher >Wonders how Andre can play GPL two hours a day, every day, yet still has >time to disagree with every post I've ever made. I didn't disagree with your F1RC opinion, that's actually the first sim we both like. And I have two hours a day to spend on GPL, but what has got that to do with this? A usual attempt from you to avoid the issue here. Really David, I respect everybodys opinion, even if they are from you. But most of your comments in the Nascar thread are too disrespectfull for words. You're unbelievable. Andre "Michael feels the same way about safety in auto racing as I do. Great minds think alike." - David G Fisher

On Fri, 23 Feb 2001 12:01:20 +0100, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote: >In my experience there's only two kinds of opinions DGF respects: >his own and those of who he agrees with. > >The regulars who disagree and haven't commented on this issue restrained >themselves because they've come to realise the futility of doing so, IMO. There was a talk about the Nascar thread on VROC yesterday, and you're right. >Jan. >=--- >PS.: Nice sig Andre. lol Cool eh? I was looking for a good quote for my sig for some time, but now I finally found one worthy enough. That Nascar thread was good for one thing after all. Andre "Michael feels the same way about safety in auto racing as I do. Great minds think alike." - David G Fisher

On Fri, 23 Feb 2001 08:38:11 +0000, Gerry Aitken <[email hidden]> wrote: >Do you live under the same stone as DGF? Geez, you call this an insult? Come on, you can do better than that, can't you? Jan

ROCKINGHAM, N.C. (Reuters) - Dale Earnhardt (news - web sites)'s seat belt broke, causing the fatal injuries that killed him on the final lap of Sunday's Daytona 500, NASCAR (news - web sites) officials said Friday. Earnhardt died of a skull fracture when he crashed into the fourth turn wall on the final lap. ``Our investigation indicates that a broken left lap seat belt came apart,'' said NASCAR president Mike Helton. ``We don't know why, we don't know how, we don't know when it broke. We aren't going to speculate. We will continue our investigation.'' Helton said all NASCAR Busch Series and Winston Cup crew chiefs have been informed of the problem in an attempt to correct any faulty seat belts in their cars. Helton said the broken left seat belt was discovered during an investigation of Earnhardt's wrecked Chevrolet on Sunday night. -- Scott B. Husted PA-Scott The Pits: PowerSims Magazine (http://www.theuspits.com)

David G Fisher wrote: > >> Not one of the people's who's [sic] opinions I respect on thisnewsgroup appeared >> in this NASCAR thread with anything negative to say to me. That's because the only people WHOSE opinions you respect are the people that agree 100% with your own rampant and brain-dead biases. Oh, and now I notice -- a distinct change from your earliest drivel on this matter -- that NASCAR *drivers* are wise, thoughtful, and benevolent beings -- it's only the fans, team owners, sanctioning body, and track owners who are -- every last one of them -- moronic, bloodthirsty, greedy, misguided, and uncaring... until, of course, you see a quote by one of them in the National Enquirer (I'm guessing that's your main source of news) that says "By golly, that David God Fisher has got something there! Something's gotta be done about these OTHER moronic, bloodthirsty, greedy, etc., etc. scumbags who are keeping the sport in the dark ages!" And a previous commentater is correct, you never answer any replies that show how wrong you are about certain of your "facts" -- open-face helmets, for example, which are used in many FIA-sanctioned events to this day. You have no facts, you just wave blank sheets of paper around in your hand like Joe McCarthy (look it up) telling the world how many Communists are in the State Department. This, however, is the best: >> The people's who's [sic] opinions I respect seem to respect mine (simdevelopers seem to as well, because the offers to test keep coming year after year). They and I may not be in the majority (here at r.a.s.), but then again I doubt any of us would feel comfortable in that position. << If you're getting "offers to test...year after year," it must be because the developers figure that if even YOU can't bollix the whole thing up, then even the most mentally-challenged pre-pubescent should be able to get through the game without it crashing every six seconds. And then comes the royal, name-dropping-without-specific-names "They and I," as if your kneejerk flamebait was sanctioned by your close friends, the World Consortium of Game Developers. I have a strong suspicion that not many people involved with EA or Papyrus, to name just two, would subscribe to the following "statements of Fisherian Fact," and I challenge you to produce a single one: From "The Collected Wisdom of David God Fisher": >> NASCAR is about beer and crashes. >> If you support NASCAR, then you support the INEVITABLE death of it's[sic] drivers. >> It's {NASCAR} simply a POORLY run, bush league type of auto racingwith fans that >> apparently don't TRULY care about the safety of it's drivers. It's an embarrassment. Or try this Gem from your treasure trove of wisdom on Phil Hill or Dan Gurney -- I'm certain they'd agree with you without hesitation: >> I didn't think the F1 drivers of the '60's...were brave, heroic or"real" drivers because >> they raced knowing death was a real possibility. I think they weresimply foolish >> people who didn't value their lives very much. Does this mean that it's only since 1994 that F1 drivers were "real" drivers, since -- according to you -- they have been CERTAIN since that time that there was no possibility of getting killed in a racing car? Did they all have mass memroy loss followinf Imola? I see in one of your latest gurglings that you admit it's *possible* a driver could actually be killed in F1; does that now make all current F1 drivers "foolish people who [don't] value their lives very much"? This, by the way, is why generalizations based on short-term and limited anecdotal evidence almost always leads to poor conclusions, as it has in regards to every single statement you made in your original troll. You know what the difference is between David God Fisher and normal, functioning human beings? Normal, functioning human beings learn from their mistakes. You, however, trip over the truth lying in the middle of the road, brush yourself off, and pretend that nothing happened -- and you do it repeatedly. As Lord Melbourne said of Thomas Babbington Macaulay: "I wish I were as cocksure of *anything* as Tom Macaulay is of *everything*" If that's a bit over your head, try this: the mere act of you giving breath to one of the malformed demi-thoughts that roil around like a cesspool on the boil in your voluminous but largely vacant pumpkin does not make that uttered demi-thought into a FACT, though you seem to think everything you say is as the revealed word of the God that is your middle name. > Average is bad.< But stupid is worse. BB

> "Our investigation indicates that a broken left lap seat belt came apart,'' > said NASCAR president Mike Helton. "We don't know why, we don't know how, > we don't know when it broke. We aren't going to speculate. We will continue > our investigation.'' Which David God Fisher knew all along -- he was just waiting for his personal friend Mike Helton to agree with him so he could launch a tirade on the shoddy J.C. Whitney seatbelts and mountings used in NASCAR, as compared to F1, where seatbelts and mountings never break. Mike Helton will now be revealed by David God Fisher to be a moral, tee-totaling, kindly and benevolent man, abandoned by the rest of NASCAR, a scum-sucking bunch of heartless gobshites whose only reason for existence is to kill as many drivers as possible for the enjoyment of the hordes of unwashed, sweaty, beer-sodden mini-Caligulas who make up the fan base of NASCAR. D. God Fisher will also reveal that the team owners, mechanics, sanitation crew, and popcorn vendors of NASCAR have entered into a blood-pact with the rest of NASCAR (not the now-noble Mike Helton, of course), the bloodthirsty and unscrupulous TV networks and the duplicitous Simpson Safety Equipment Co. to ensure that the aforementioned shoddy J.C. Whitney seatbelts are surreptitiously altered to look like REAL 6-point harnesses, all to promote the bloodbath that the Neanderthal, beer-swilling, undereducated, dirt-eating, wife (or husband)-beating, nose-picking NASCAR fan demands. You heard it here first. BB

Sure, we have a written agreement not to disagree in public. ;-) Jan. =--- David G Fisher wrote... > > <snip> > Nice try Andre, but you're reaching. I see Jan is backing > you up, as usual. > > David G Fisher

> If you lived in the U.S. you >might have a clue as to how they are perceived here by the overwhelming >majority of the public. If you had ever spoke to someone from the western half of YOUR OWN STATE, you'd have a completely different outlook on the sport. Yet another bullshit"e" argument. - Alan Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

Jan Loebzien wrote: > Geez, you call this an insult? > Come on, you can do better than that, can't you? Ok son, you asked for it so brace yourself! Your father was a hamster, and your mother smells of elderberries! Cheers Gerry "I have a very good life, and I made it this way by avoiding the way of thinking of "the average guy"." - David God Fisher

Jeff Vincent wrote: > Is there anyone who *doesn't* think so? Jeff, there's always one :(. Gerry "I am in the vast majority with my opinions on this subject." - David God Fisher

>> ::rolls eyes:: > >Why do AOL users make it so hard *not* to develop prejudices? ;-) > I'm going to guess that you're being sarcastic and all, since that within itself is a prejudice. :) - Alan Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

>"Barton Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote > You can pick up your F.M.M. Golden Turd award at Frankie Menard's > chateau in suburban Montreal at your convenience... ouch x2. now cmon Bart. I never went that far. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- People think it must be fun to be a genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

ymenard wrote: > > now cmon Bart. I never went that far. I don't want to hear about your love life, Frank... BB

LOL :) "Colin Harris" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:kP7l6.1193$[email hidden]... > > Personally, I think anyone who puts their middle initial in theirsignature > is opinionated and rarely has anything interesting to say. > > Yours, > > Colin J Harris.

"Barton Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> David G Fisher wrote: > > > >> Not one of the people's who's [sic] opinions I respect on this > newsgroup appeared > >> in this NASCAR thread with anything negative to say to me. > > That's because the only people WHOSE opinions you respect are the > people that agree 100% with your own rampant and brain-dead biases.

As I said before, if David God Fisher (as you like to call me) was in charge of NASCAR, one of the first things I would of done is make full face helmets mandatory. Earnhardt might be alive today. "Bohannon, who tried to save Earnhardt's life as the driver sat slumped in the wreckage, said Earnhardt's chin might have hit the steering wheel, causing the major head injury that killed him on impact. A skull fracture ran from the front to the back of his brain." You're an idiot. David G Fisher

Really? They make no sense? One of my suggestions (something I can't believe isn't already required) was to make full-faced helmets mandatory. Here's what you said about that. "Not having a full helmet had no effect on what happened to DE from anything I have read. The rest of your ideas don't have any bearing worth responding to." From today. " 'Bohannon, who tried to save Earnhardt's life as the driver sat slumped in the wreckage, said Earnhardt's chin might have hit the steering wheel, causing the major head injury that killed him on impact. A skull fracture ran from the front to the back of his brain. . . Mr. Earnhardt more than likely contacted the steering wheel with his face,' Bohannon said." As I said in my first post. PATHETIC. Pathetic the way the sport is run. Pathetic the way the fans refuse to see the obvious. Pathetic is the word for this thread. David G Fisher "Scott B. Husted" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> The reason they can't "figure it out" is because your suggestions make no > sense to the sport of NASCAR Racing outside of the soft wall technology. > > You can mandate the hans device and put airbags in the car as far as I'm > concerned, it won't guarantee drivers won't die when they go from 170+ mph > to 0. NASCAR racing is NOT F1 or any other form of ROAD RACING. Its a > unique form of racing and if you can't accept that fact, then you

shouldn't > watch it because all the drivers and true fans understand the risks > involved. > > The human body does not tolerate those kind of g-forces well no matterwhat > device you are wearing. You can wear whatever you want in NASCAR as some > drivers have worn the Hans device and some chose not too. It's aconscious > decision on their part. Not having a full helmet had no effect on what > happened to DE from anything I have read. The rest of your ideas don't > have any bearing worth responding too. The only thing you left out was > replacing the V8s with Briggs and Stratons and require all the cars tohave > governors and limiters keeping them under the 5mph bumper test limits. > > -- > Scott B. Husted > "PA-Scott" > ICQ# 4395450

>"Barton Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote > >ymenard wrote: > > now cmon Bart. I never went that far. > > I don't want to hear about your love life, Frank... Hehe good one, seriously ;-) -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- People think it must be fun to be a genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

David G Fisher wrote: > From today. > " 'Bohannon, who tried to save Earnhardt's life as the driver sat slumped in > the wreckage, said Earnhardt's chin might have hit the steering wheel, > causing the major head injury that killed him on impact. A skull fracture > ran from the front to the back of his brain. . . Mr. Earnhardt more than > likely contacted the steering wheel with his face,' Bohannon said." Key phrases for you: "...might have...", "...more than likely...". > As I said in my first post. PATHETIC. Pathetic the way the sport is run. > Pathetic the way the fans refuse to see the obvious. Pathetic is the word > for this thread. Pathetic, yes as someone who seems to major in pathetic, you should know. Gerry "PATHETIC." - David P Fisher

And as I said at the time....... "Not having a full helmet had no effect on what happened to DE from anything I have read." Until today, there was nothing to suggest a full faced helmet would have made a difference considering that doctor said at the time that there were NO FACIAL INJURIES. That kind of flies in the face of the discussion today of what "MIGHT HAVE" happened doesn't it? The Seatbelt broke.. now this is NASCARs fault too right? Since you appear to love pathetic so much, I suggest you by yourself a mirror. -- Scott B. Husted PA-Scott The Pits: PowerSims Magazine (http://www.theuspits.com)

>As I said in my first post. PATHETIC. Pathetic the way the sport is run. >Pathetic the way the fans refuse to see the obvious. Pathetic is the word >for this thread. But it wouldn't have happened had his SEATBELT NOT BROKE! Did you know that his seatbelt had broken, genius? I HIGHLY doubt it. Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

And for God's infomation, Seatbelts in F1 car's have broken. Remember the Late Great Giles Villeneuve. russell > > Which David God Fisher knew all along -- he was just waiting for his > personal friend Mike Helton to agree with him so he could launch a > tirade on the shoddy J.C. Whitney seatbelts and mountings used in > NASCAR, as compared to F1, where seatbelts and mountings never break.

David G Fisher wrote:

Quoted text (22 lines)

> > "Barton Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > David G Fisher wrote: > > > > > >> Not one of the people's who's [sic] opinions I respect on this > > newsgroup appeared > > >> in this NASCAR thread with anything negative to say to me. > > > > That's because the only people WHOSE opinions you respect are the > > people that agree 100% with your own rampant and brain-dead biases. > > As I said before, if David God Fisher (as you like to call me) was in charge > of NASCAR, one of the first things I would of done is make full face helmets > mandatory. Earnhardt might be alive today. > > "Bohannon, who tried to save Earnhardt's life as the driver sat slumped in > the wreckage, said Earnhardt's chin might have hit the steering wheel, > causing the major head injury that killed him on impact. A skull fracture > ran from the front to the back of his brain." > > You're an idiot.

ESAD. -- Fester

David G Fisher wrote: > > You're an idiot. Oh, well then -- that says it all, doesn't it? BB

Do you own a pair of Tap Shoes? You sure like to dance around questions "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:wzrl6.6637$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > "Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 21:22:12 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> > > wrote: > > > > >BTW, I didn't create any mess. When I read something that I honestly

feel > is > > >ridiculous (as you and some others claimed my post was), I don't wastemy

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > >time responding. Why do you? > > > > > >David G Fisher > > > > Because you actually think that if someone doesn't respond, he > > automatically agrees with you. > > From your previous post: > > > Not one of the people's who's opinions I respect on this newsgroup > appeared > > > in this NASCAR thread with anything negative to say to me. > > Nice try Andre, but you're reaching. I see Jan is backing you up, as

usual. > > David G Fisher > Wonders how Andre can play GPL two hours a day, every day, yet still has > time to disagree with every post I've ever made. >

The only thing pathetic here is your sorry ass. Do us all a favor, go to a C prompt, and type Format C: At least we might get a day or two without your pathetic rambling. Pansyass -- Don Burnette "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:PGAl6.7794$[email hidden]... > Really? They make no sense? One of my suggestions (something I can't believe > isn't already required) was to make full-faced helmets mandatory. Here's > what you said about that. > > "Not having a full helmet had no effect on what > happened to DE from anything I have read. The rest of your ideas don't > have any bearing worth responding to." > > From today. > " 'Bohannon, who tried to save Earnhardt's life as the driver sat slumped in > the wreckage, said Earnhardt's chin might have hit the steering wheel, > causing the major head injury that killed him on impact. A skull fracture > ran from the front to the back of his brain. . . Mr. Earnhardt more than > likely contacted the steering wheel with his face,' Bohannon said." > > As I said in my first post. PATHETIC. Pathetic the way the sport is run. > Pathetic the way the fans refuse to see the obvious. Pathetic is the word > for this thread. > > David G Fisher > > > "Scott B. Husted" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > The reason they can't "figure it out" is because your suggestions make no > > sense to the sport of NASCAR Racing outside of the soft wall technology. > > > > You can mandate the hans device and put airbags in the car as far as I'm > > concerned, it won't guarantee drivers won't die when they go from 170+ mph > > to 0. NASCAR racing is NOT F1 or any other form of ROAD RACING. Its a > > unique form of racing and if you can't accept that fact, then you > shouldn't > > watch it because all the drivers and true fans understand the risks > > involved. > > > > The human body does not tolerate those kind of g-forces well no matter > what > > device you are wearing. You can wear whatever you want in NASCAR as some > > drivers have worn the Hans device and some chose not too. It's a > conscious > > decision on their part. Not having a full helmet had no effect on what > > happened to DE from anything I have read. The rest of your ideas don't > > have any bearing worth responding too. The only thing you left out was > > replacing the V8s with Briggs and Stratons and require all the cars to > have > > governors and limiters keeping them under the 5mph bumper test limits. > > > > -- > > Scott B. Husted > > "PA-Scott" > > ICQ# 4395450 > >

Hey Scott, just think - if David P.A. had invented seat belts about 10 years earlier, a lot more lives would be saved. He needs to hole up in a cabin somewhere with Ralph Nader for about 6 months. -- Don Burnette "Scott B. Husted" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Y6Bl6.3443$[email hidden]... > And as I said at the time....... "Not having a full helmet had no effect on > what happened to DE from anything I have read." Until today, there was > nothing to suggest a full faced helmet would have made a difference > considering that doctor said at the time that there were NO FACIAL INJURIES. > That kind of flies in the face of the discussion today of what "MIGHT HAVE" > happened doesn't it? > > The Seatbelt broke.. now this is NASCARs fault too right? > > Since you appear to love pathetic so much, I suggest you by yourself a > mirror. > -- > Scott B. Husted > PA-Scott > The Pits: PowerSims Magazine (http://www.theuspits.com) > > > >

On 23 Feb 2001 19:15:52 GMT, [email hidden] (Alan Conceicao) wrote: >I'm going to guess that you're being sarcastic and all, since that within >itself is a prejudice. :) Well it was at least meant to be ironic, as indicated by the ';-)'. Should I knot have expected an AOL user to recognize that? Hehe, sorry, could not resist. :) Jan

On Fri, 23 Feb 2001 21:10:39 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >You're an idiot. "The life of a super genius is just so frustrating, having to deal with so many idiots..." -- Calvin "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

On Fri, 23 Feb 2001 18:59:24 +0000, Gerry Aitken <[email hidden]> wrote: >Jeff Vincent wrote: > >> Is there anyone who *doesn't* think so? > >Jeff, there's always one :(. God himself doesn't count! :) >"I am in the vast majority with my opinions >on this subject." - David God Fisher Or as Mrs. Slocum might say on "Are You Being Served" "And I am unanimous in this...." :) "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

Keep 'em comin', DGF -- I think you've just about got 'em all convinced of your omniscience! BB

>Well it was at least meant to be ironic, as indicated by the ';-)'. >Should I knot have expected an AOL user to recognize that? Next time I'll know "knot" to even bother replying to such a thread. :)P -Well, at least we AOLers use the correct word. ;-) - Alan Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

On 24 Feb 2001 06:05:56 GMT, [email hidden] (Alan Conceicao) wrote: >Next time I'll know "knot" to even bother replying to such a thread. :)P > >-Well, at least we AOLers use the correct word. ;-) - But appaerantly you do knot now that picking on speling errors is thelamest arguement one can com up with in a discusion, do you? :) Jan

>But appaerantly you do knot now that picking on speling errors is >thelamest arguement one can com up with in a discusion, do you? :) > Butt uf course. :) - Alan Dale Earnhardt, 1951-2001: "The Last American Hero" R.I.P.

Yeah, but if no one was watching and they didn't get paid big bucks to do it, they wouldn't race and wouldn't die. Just because someone is willing to risk their lives for money and fame, we dont have to contribute to it by supporting it. When people die in the name of fun and sport, something is wrong.. On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 05:37:28 GMT, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (16 lines)

>>"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote >> If F1 can have such a tremendous safety record, then there is NO excuse >for >> NASCAR's terrible one. It's THAT simple. > > >Uh LOL sure David everybody is entitled to his opinion, whatever rationale >it is.. ;) > >Did you scream that babbling in 1994 when Senna and Ratzenberger both died >the same weekend, when Wendlinger got a severe crash at Monaco, when >Barrichello had a death-defying crash from the lack of safety in Imola's >track configuration, etc..? > >Racing is dangerous. People have, are and will continue to be killed or >severely injured. Deal with it, or stop watching it.

On Sat, 24 Feb 2001 15:32:08 -0600, rrevved <[email hidden]> wrote: >>Yeah, but if no one was watching and they didn't get paid big bucks to >>do it, they wouldn't race and wouldn't die. > >Incorrect. Have you ever heard of amateur racing? The SCCA? Yeah, and where do you think these amateurs hope they'll end up why day? And who are they modeling themselves after?

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >>Just because someone is >>willing to risk their lives for money and fame, we dont have to >>contribute to it by supporting it. When people die in the name of fun >>and sport, something is wrong.. >> > >So, you never watch auto races?

Rarely to none.

Luckydaze wrote: > > Yeah, but if no one was watching and they didn't get paid big bucks to > do it, they wouldn't race and wouldn't die. Just because someone is > willing to risk their lives for money and fame, we dont have to > contribute to it by supporting it. When people die in the name of fun > and sport, something is wrong.. Most racers I've known would race whether there was money involved or not. For one to be able to actually make a living at it is just the frosting on the cake. -- Fester

hooch wrote: > > >So, you never watch auto races? > > Rarely to none. So why are you trolling in here?

On Sat, 24 Feb 2001 20:21:35 -0600, rrevved <[email hidden]> wrote: >Then go away. > >See how simple that was? You mean the same you did from the flight-sim NG where people get sick and tired of your crap? I guess they haven't got wind of you yet here... Screw you See how simple that was?

Luckydaze wrote: > > You mean the same you did from the flight-sim NG where people > get sick and tired of your crap? I guess they haven't got wind of you yet here... Actually, we've been getting his wind for quite some time here, but nobody knows how to get rid of him... there's a LOT of that goin' around in this NG...

On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:44:02 GMT, Barton Brown <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (11 lines)

>I'm not saying NASCAR has no problems -- I'd say they've found >themselves in almost exactly the same situation F1 did 7 years ago, >after Senna and Ratzenberger -- and damned near Barrichello -- perished >at Imola, and then BOOM! ... two weeks later, Wendlinger takes an >incredible thump at Monaco. All the same things were being said then >about F1 that you're blithering now about NASCAR. The unfortunate deaths >of Scott Brayton and Jeff Krosnoff engendered similar hysterical >reactions for Indycar racing (and isn't it an interesting comment on the >state of American news that the only time the major networks even deign >to mention motorsports is when somebody dies? -- it has ever been thus, >on this side of the pond).

Having watched this debate for a while, though my better instinct advises against it I feel compelled to step in and say that to some extent I agree with David. For sure his tone and words were provocative, intentionally or otherwise, but I think NASCAR really does need to stop and take a long hard look at itself. IMO Dale's impact really didn't look that bad compared to some where the driver just dusted himself off and walked away. So why was he killed? As you said, NASCAR now is, from an on-track point of view, where F1 was after Imola. Drivers dead, drivers hurt, worldwide shock. Where it differs seems to be in the off-track reaction to that. I shouted against a lot of the changes made to F1 in 1994 as "knee-jerk", nd unnecessary, and oerhaps they were over the top. But they worked. You will never make motorsport 100% safe, but if you've made it 99% safe you can make it 99.1 or 99.2. After Imola the FIA seemed to disregard "the show" and say "how do we make these guys safe?". In some of the posturing earlier in the thread there was the usual comparison about "F1 doesn't run side by side", and "NASCAR doesn't do Eau Rouge". Remember that Eau Rouge was GONE in 1994 because it was thought too unsafe - would NASCAR ban side-by-side if they thought it unsafe? That's a crazy statement, but nothing should be considered sacrosanct when thinking how to make things safe. Now the cars are safer in F1, both Villeneuve and Zonta have had HUGE shunts at Eau Rouge, both walked away without a scratch. If it happened pre 1994....? I dread to think. Villeneuve is one of the most "gung-ho" drivers in F1, yet in a recent interview he says "If I'm honest I'm very happy with the current level of safety in F1, because you can have a big crash, get knocked about a bit and walk out OK. That's fantastic". If the F1 drivers say that the FIA have been doing their job. If the NASCAR drivers are saying the opposite of that, shouldn't the governing body be listening? >Motor racing is dangerous. It has always been dangerous. Like it or not, >if there were no danger involved, it would lose much of its appeal. The man who coined that phrase died in a Hockenheim forest 23 years ago, and we all agree it was a tragedy. However between then and now wee have shown that it is possible to reduce the danger massively while reducing the appeal only a slightly. The downside is you make it safe enough for drivers like Senna, Schumacher (and Earnhardt) to put other drivers in situations where before it would have been hugely dangerous, but that's the rub.

Quoted text (8 lines)

>If >-- God forbid -- in the 2001 F1 season, 1 or 2 or 4 or 5 drivers, pit >crew, or spectators lose their lives, your entire generalized, >anecdotal house of cards would collapse. And don't for a moment think it >can't happen in today's F1: there were many accidents last year that >could have easily gone the wrong way. It's not very many years since >Hakkinen nearly lost his life, Jos Verstappen... well, I could go on >(and I do).

The point is that thanks to the changes of the past we can say it is massively less likely froom one decade to the next, even no from one season to the next. If, however, it did, I would expect instant action to redress whatever caused the problem. From each accident you mention knowledge was gleaned, and put to use to ensure no repeat, and I hope the same will be done in NASCAR. >At the Daytona 500 this year, NASCAR ran out of luck, like >F1 did at Imola in 1994. But how to react? Should HANS be mandatory? Perhaps not from what I've read of it, but it should be looked at. Should there be a maximum age of drivers? Should tactics like Earnhardt's be more clearly outlawed? Should the rules allow more advanced materials for a survival cell for the driver? Should the walls be reviewed, perhaps with a crumple zone? The difficulty I see for NASCAR is that a lot of it's appeal lies in the "good old boy" stakes, where it is macho, it is big, bruising machines at incredible speeds, it doesn't have space-age technology of that hi-falutin' F1 stuff and so on. It makes it difficult to adapt the show for safety whie maintaining that appeal, but it would be enormously disrespectful to the drivers who have died if that played any part in the decision making process, and I don't think it will. >There is no doubt that barrier technology, head >restraints, retention of suspension members (something the FIA was >supposed to have addressed after Senna's freak accident, but recent >crashes in F1 show that the forces involved defeat all efforts at >retention), The forces involved CAN defeat all efforts in retention. Okay, so you can't tether all of the wheels all of the time, but if you can tether most of the wheels most of the time that's massively reduced the potential for injury. Such is the way of safety. You don't look for the one big step to Utopia, you kaizen it. I'm not a big fan of NASCAR, and I hope that doesn't come across in this post. However I am a big fan of motorsport, and I was as shocked about Earnhardt as about any other tragedy in the sport. No entertainer should have to put their life at risk just to be a part of a show, without knowing that everything possible was done to minimise the risk, and I feel the time is long overdue to review oval safety. I was reading yesterday about Clark's races in the Indy 500, and how in the race when he finally won two drivers were killed in the opening laps - we've come a long way since then, but have we done everything possible, or even everything reasonable? As fans we have a lot of say, and if we are in any way unsatisfied owe it to the drivers we like and the sport we love to let the bosses know, let the TV channels know, and vote with our wallets and our feet. John

On Fri, 23 Feb 2001 00:16:04 GMT, "Don Burnette" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Lol, those pansies would pee their pants if they had to race like that. Posts like that help nothing. Look at Senna and Mansell at Barcelona, 1991. The cars are as close as any NASCAR race - if they touch, both cars flip at 200mph. If a NASCAR touches.....nothing happens. So who would you say are the pansies? If you don't like another sport fair enough, but I don't think I'm a pansy, and I don't think you are either - but I know neither of us could do that in an F1 car or a NASCAR. John

On Fri, 23 Feb 2001 01:27:24 +0000, Graeme Nash <[email hidden]> wrote: >So are you saying that in F1, there is zero potential of a fatal >accident? Are you saying in climbing down the stairs in your house there is zero potential of a fatal accident? If you can't sy that, how can you possibly contrast with motorsport in such a black and white manner? John

John wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > On Fri, 23 Feb 2001 01:27:24 +0000, Graeme Nash > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >So are you saying that in F1, there is zero potential of a fatal > >accident? > > Are you saying in climbing down the stairs in your house there is zero > potential of a fatal accident? If you can't sy that, how can you > possibly contrast with motorsport in such a black and white manner? > > John

You're taking what he say out of context. Put it back in the context of trying to reason with a moron, in this case DGF, and it should make sense. Best Gerry "Just put me in your kill file." -- David G Fisher

>Are you saying in climbing down the stairs in your house there is zero >potential of a fatal accident? If you can't sy that, how can you >possibly contrast with motorsport in such a black and white manner? Ummm... re-read the thread :-) -- Cheers! Graeme Nash

On Fri, 23 Feb 2001 12:20:21 GMT, [email hidden] (Andre Warringa) wrote: <snip>

Quoted text (8 lines)

>I don't care about your opinion David, I found your original post >respectless and offending, but I chose to ignore it. >But saying that you don't respect the people who replied to your >nonsense is simply disgusting. > >Let me guess your answer: >a) No reply at all >b) "I didn't say that"

Surprise surprise, the correct answer was a! :) Andre Andre "Michael feels the same way about safety in auto racing as I do. Great minds think alike." - David G Fisher

Say, what's happened to the old motormouth mushhead DG Fisher; has he killfiled himself (if wishes were fishes...)? BB

In article <HO%k6.2676$[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (14 lines)

>I have given stats. > >NASCAR = four deaths in nine months. > >F1= zero deaths in seven years. > >NASCAR fans find these stats acceptable by continuing to support this form >of motor racing "as is". The people who run the sport accept these stats. >That's why I, and many others, see this as a poor form of auto racing. Add >in the fact that the drivers are often old and chubby, and that they run on >tracks where turning left is the only requirement, and the cars are low tech >boats, and drinking lots and lots of beer is a requirement of the fans, >then you begin to understand our views. >

1. Do you *really* think that any Nascar fan *wants* to see someone die? Not hardly. 2. Drivers are often old and chubby? Are you in THAT much of a timewarp? You should realize that most of the current drivers understand the physical and mental strength needed to race competitively. 3. There are also other race series that run on ovals - Cart, IRL, WoO, Modifieds, etc. That doesn't make it a bad thing. 4. Low tech boats? Hell, ANYTHING is low tech compared to F1. I'll give you 'part' of that one... 5. Contrary to your UN-popular opinion, drinking 'lots and lots of beer' isn't a requirement of the fans. That's just such a stupid statement that I even hesitate to respond to it. You seem to have very strange views on Nascar. How you originally formed these opinions, I don't know. It might make a great psych paper. But you come here, slam the race series AND its fans, and wonder why people get pissed at you?!? Amazing. Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL F1 hcp. +28.67...F2 +151.26...F3 hcp. +373.73 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

On 26 Feb 2001 21:35:19 GMT, [email hidden] (EldredP) wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>In article <HO%k6.2676$[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" ><[email hidden]> writes: > >>I have given stats. >> >>NASCAR = four deaths in nine months. >> >>F1= zero deaths in seven years.

US-Drivers = 114 deaths per day (1999 statistics). Perhaps US-drivers should be shut-down. Matt

On 26 Feb 2001 21:35:19 GMT, [email hidden] (EldredP) wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

>1. Do you *really* think that any Nascar fan *wants* to see someone die? Not >hardly. > 2. Drivers are often old and chubby? Are you in THAT much of a timewarp? You >should realize that most of the current drivers understand the physical and >mental strength needed to race competitively. >3. There are also other race series that run on ovals - Cart, IRL, WoO, >Modifieds, etc. That doesn't make it a bad thing. >4. Low tech boats? Hell, ANYTHING is low tech compared to F1. I'll give you >'part' of that one... >5. Contrary to your UN-popular opinion, drinking 'lots and lots of beer' isn't >a requirement of the fans. That's just such a stupid statement that I even >hesitate to respond to it.

La lala lala... <plugging ears> He caaaan't heeeear yooooou! :) >Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you >with experience... Strict adherence to your sig sure would have killed this thread early. :| "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

Killed whilst doing something seemingly innocent would be the nice ironic thing for him... -- -- Dan Francis "Barton Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Say, what's happened to the old motormouth mushhead DG Fisher; has he > killfiled himself (if wishes were fishes...)? > > BB

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Jeff Vincent) writes: >>Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you >>with experience... > > Strict adherence to your sig sure would have killed this thread >early. :| <blushes> Yeah, you're right...<g> I quit... Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL F1 hcp. +28.67...F2 +151.26...F3 hcp. +373.73 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.