As there was very little news about NASCAR in the last few days (other than the possibility of A.J. Allmendinger inheriting the Elliott Sadler No 19 ride), some analysts started talking once again about shortening Sprint Cup races.
The idea was first used back in the 1970's when there was a first gas crunch in the United States. Some races were trimmed down from 500 milers to 400 (such was also the case for some Darlington races in 1994 to 2004, Dover for both races in 1997-98, Richmond for both races in 1976 but not necessarily for fuel economy). Now the idea is resurfacing for quite a few good reasons. One of them addresses the probability that the 43-car field might not be completed at all races (because of a lack of sponsorship). Cutting off some 100 miles of some races could also enhance competition forcing drivers to go for it a lot sooner. Some fans have already expressed they would feel cheated if NASCAR charged the original price of a longer race for a shorter one while others do agree with the solution as long as NASCAR does not cut such legendary races as the Daytona 500, the Talladega 500 or the Coca-Cola 600. Being a color commentator on live NASCAR races at RDS (French TSN), I think that a maximum of three hours of racing should be enough not to tire out viewers. But I agree that this time frame should not apply to some legendary races as mentioned earlier. If you watch a Craftsman (now Camping World) Truck event, you'll see quite a lot of action since the races are shorter. Could that be applied to some Sprint Cup races that have proven to be too «quiet» in the last few years? There are rumours that we might have more news to talk about early in January 2009 though there will be no Daytona and California practice sessions this year because of the latest NASCAR rules forbidding testing on tracks that are officially used for a NASCAR event. We'll see what comes out of it. Meanwhile, have a great NASCAR New Year ! Recent Articles
|
Racing Multimedia
Recommendations |