Point. Counter Point. IndyCar, Fontana, and Danger.

If you are a racing fan and care about IndyCar, you have probably already read these two great op-eds on what occurred last Saturday at Auto Club Speedway. Robin Miller said:

And what we witnessed Saturday at Auto Club Speedway was somewhere between the measured insanity of the 1960s and a jaw-dropping display of reflexes and reaction at 220mph.
It was incredible theatre, with a record 80 lead changes among 14 of the 23 drivers and three hours of intensity that’s hard to be imagined or duplicated.

Mr. Miller’s main point being that the element of danger, was the compelling hook that made the race so exciting.

David Malsher has a different view:

In terms of entertainment, last Saturday’s MAVTV 500 at Auto Club Speedway, Fontana, was a hit. As a piece of sport, it was almost entirely without merit. Once the track gripped up, not long into the second stint, and every driver’s throttle was planted on the bulkhead, it became a slipstreaming crapshoot. Yes, it required the same bravery as Indy car racing has always demanded. No, it did not require the same skill as we’ve seen through the decades from the likes of A.J. Foyt, Parnelli Jones, the Unsers, the Andrettis, Rutherford, Sneva, Mears. They had to balance their cars on the edge of adhesion, decide how much throttle to apply, how much room they had to correct the slide, how to balance tire life over the course of a stint. What we saw last Saturday was about balls and a lack of imagination.

There is inherent danger in the sport; Mr. Malsher thought the danger was too over the top.

I’m really not sure where I stand in this debate, but I do think the continued conversation is good for IndyCar, and it was worth pointing out here because RACER deserves some positive press for their outstanding work.


Leave a Reply