|
 |   |
|
EVENTS Fantasy Central Inside Game Multimedia Central Statitudes Your Turn Message Boards Email Newsletters Golf Guide Cities Work in Sports
CNNSI.com GROUP
COMMERCE |  |
Enjoying the good eats of Indy
Sports Illustrated motor sports writer Mark Bechtel will answer your questions every Friday. Click here to send him a question. This weekend Bechtel is in Indianapolis covering the Brickyard 400. Greetings from Indy, home of the finest shrimp cocktail you will ever eat. There's a restaurant downtown called St. Elmo's. Not St. Elmo's Fire, mind you, but St. Elmo's. The fire is supplied by the cocktail sauce they serve, which is equal parts ketchup, horseradish and lighter fluid. It tastes divine, and it will also clean your sinuses out. It also guarantees that no one is going to kiss you until you brush your teeth four times and gargle half a bottle of Listermint. I bring food up because Indianapolis is Michael Waltrip's favorite town on the NASCAR circuit for eats. And what makes his opinion so important? Well, he once weighed 242 pounds. As for my favorite place to grub on the road, I'm going to have to go with Sonoma, Calif. There's this place on the square in downtown Sonoma that is to die for. And the vino ain't half bad, either. On to the 'Bag:
First of all, with Bobby Labonte's and Dale Jarrett's consistency week-in and week-out, does Dale Earnhardt still have a legitimate shot at his eighth championship, after falling 107 points back at Pocono? Also, what has happened to Dale Earnhardt Jr., who looked so dominating in qualifying and contended earlier this year when he was winning poles and races. Dave, the elder Earnhardt is going to need a little help in the form of a bad finish or two from Labonte and Jarrett, but he certainly has a chance to win this thing. (We'll talk more about the points system later.) As for Junior, you've got to keep in mind that he's a rookie. He probably isn't as good as he appeared to be early in the year, and he's probably better than he's showing now.
My letter is in regard to the level of competitiveness that Dodge will be able to establish once it re-enters the Winston Cup Series in 2001. I believe what is most fascinating about Dodge's re-entry into the sport is that it will be competitive virtually from day one because NASCAR would not let a particular make flounder at the bottom of the standings. With this in mind, one would have to question why we, the fans, should support one brand over another when NASCAR makes them all inherently equal? So Mark, should I abandon my brand loyalty or continue to support one make over another? Dan, you're right. NASCAR will certainly see to it that Dodge is competitive. But the cars aren't inherently equal. Close, but not quite equal. Even if they look alike and run similarly, they still have different factory logos, and that's a pretty big difference -- at least symbolically. I think the fact that fans are loyal to a brand is cool, and their loyalty is noticed by the factories (as well as sponsors). I'd stay loyal. But I haven't had a car for five years, so what do I know?
With the new TV deal next year, the cost of fielding a team is going to really increase. Is this going to be the downfall of Winston Cup racing? Can corporate America actually support 43 cars at $10-million-a-year sponsorships to have most run at mid-pack? Or will it turn into a CART/Formula One-type of racing with 24-25 cars? It seems when the money starts getting huge the problems start. David, I don't know if NASCAR will sit by and let teams fall by the wayside. But it might have to figure out how to level the playing field. Baseball has taken a beating ever since "small-market" and "big-market" entered its lexicon. And with money becoming such a big issue, we might see a similar thing happen in NASCAR. Hopefully teams won't be priced out of competing, but one thing is certain: The days of guys showing up on shoestring budgets and driving without major sponsors are soon to be a thing of the past.
What do you think about Jerry Nadeau? Will he be the next Jeff Gordon, as Rick Hendrick had said? I like him. I keep saying he's going to win a race sometime soon. He's got a good team, a good owner and he's a good driver. He's had a couple of really nice runs (Charlotte and Sonoma, for example), and as he gets experience and time with his crew, I think he'll be able to be a consistent top-10 or top-15 driver. The only downside is that his public relatons guy, Bob Margolis, is a huge fan of the band Yes.
I disagree with your top-five all-time NASCAR drivers for two reasons. You could have easily replaced Jeff Gordon with Fireball Roberts, who could have won the NASCAR title if he raced full-time. Move Dale Earnhardt to fifth, put Roberts at fourth and rank Cale Yarborough third, because of the same reason you picked Gordon. He dominated NASCAR and beat out Petty, Pearson, Baker, Allison and Waltrip for three straight years. Kit, O.K. That's a valid argument, but I'm sticking with Gordon.
With all the head injuries he has sustained in recent years, do you see Christian Fittipaldi as being the Ernie Irvan of CART? How many more hits can he take before having to get out of the driver's seat? Philip, in answer to the first question, hopefully not. The odds are in his favor so long as he keeps wearing the Head and Neck System (HANS). He was wearing it when he hit the wall in Chicago for the Target Grand Prix, and his wreck could have been a lot worse had he not had HANS on. If I were a driver, there's no way I'd drive without it.
It seems like all the drivers are talking about making the top five now instead of winning. Do you think this will make Winston Cup dull? I don't remember hearing this two years ago. Even Mike Skinner talks about finishing in the top five instead of winning. Do you think there should be more points and money for a win? I think the points system should reward the winner more than it does. It is mathematically possible to win a race and get the same number of points as the guy who comes in second. If the runner-up leads the most laps, he and the winner both get 180 points. (It happened three times last year). NASCAR is looking to reward consistency, but I'd like to see a system that encourages drivers to go for the win. In your typical race, there might be a $50,000 difference from first to second place. But the difference between first and second in the season-end Winston Cup payout is $1.95 million, so no driver is going to risk a chance to cash that check just to win one race.
Is it mathematically possible to win the FedEx Championship Series on Most Laps and Pole Position points, as long as no other driver wins more than two races each? What a strange, strange season it's been. Hmmmm. I fancy myself as a pretty good mathematician, so I'll give this a crack. (In fact, one of my colleagues at Sports Illustrated and I have kicked around the idea of opening a math store.) My answer, and I could be wrong but I don't think I am, is no, so long as there isn't a ton of drivers who don't run full schedules. There are 101 points available per race, plus one for leading the most laps and one for winning the pole. Assuming our hypothetical driver wins those two every week, he would finish with 40. So the other 23 drivers would divvy up the remaining 2,020 points (101 times 20 races). That's an average of 87.8 points per man, and it is an immutable mathematical certainty that at least one driver will exceed that number, unless all hit it exactly. In either case, someone is going to have more than 40. Click here to send Bechtel a question.
| ||||||||||||||||||||
