Anyone else disappointed in the 'new' Bristol?
Shanghai McCoy
fewer accidents...seems to be more single file now...
bob.p...@gmail.com
> Seems to me the racing's just not as good - and not because there are
> fewer accidents...seems to be more single file now...
I disagree.
The old Bristol was a lot more single file as right down on the white
line was unquestionably the best way around. That's one of the things
that contributed to the larger number of wrecks---everybody rooting
for space at the bottom of the track.
With the progressive banking, there's a usable higher line so you can
run side by side a lot better now and you don't have as many cars
going for the same piece of race track as before.
I think they've made it better.
John McCoy
@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com:
Which one is the "old Bristol"? The one from two years ago? 10
years ago? Back in the 80's when it was asphalt?
I think the current track is better than the one which immediately
preceeded it, which as Bob says was very much single groove on
the bottom. It's hard to say if it's better than the track from
several years ago, because the cars are so much poorer now (and
in that, I include both the CoT and the aero car).
I think this past race (which, incidently, I was watching in a
sports bar together with the Dolphins and Marlins games, so I
wasn't as attentive to detail as I might have been) suffered
from Busch running alone out front for so much of the race.
I blame that on the current car, tho, not the current track.
John
Tom Duwe
"Shanghai McCoy" <MTWi...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:<yt_tk.14854$Fr1....@newsfe03.iad>...
> Seems to me the racing's just not as good - and not because there are
> fewer accidents...seems to be more single file now...
Then you haven't been at the track for any of the races since the re-pave and have
been limited to only the view the tv folks provide.
Much more racing for position all the way back in the pack and a treat to watch
some drivers attempt to come from the back. Also neat to watch those with
moderately good handling cars battle to hold off the leader to try to retain the
spot for the (bogus) free pass...but(!!), with the better racing, there's a lot
fewer cautions, hence a lot fewer (bogus) free passes!
I really don't want to have many of the race laps used up under the yellow flag.
This time I discovered my only problem with the new surface...with only a couple
quickie yellows followed by a red flag, the lines for the men's room were waaaaay
longer than normal!
--
Tom in Bristol
Martin X. Moleski, SJ
> ... with the better racing, there's a lot
>fewer cautions, hence a lot fewer (bogus) free passes!
I very much appreciate the reduction in the number of
cautions.
I was at two night races in Bristol a few years back
(the Busch and the Winston, now Nationwide and Sprint).
The cautions got old real quick. I forget whether the
number was 13 or 18.
To my taste, the fewer the cautions, the better.
Marty
--
Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.
Chuck Steak
>Seems to me the racing's just not as good - and not because there are
>fewer accidents...seems to be more single file now...
No comparison, imo.
The "racing" is much better now.
I used to get a lot of crap about talking about
how Bristol was really never that good of a "race",
but an awesome event to go to.
But the ones that I have been to in past years,
quite frankly were not very good.
One lane racing, no passing. More done
in the pits, than on the track, and because they would
run 100 laps under caution, there was a lot of position
changing that way..
Today.... there are a couple of decent grooves going,
and fewer wrecks, because of not HAVING to fight
for the same real estate...
I like it better.
Dan
****************************************
Defeat isn't falling down.
Defeat is not getting back up......
bob.p...@gmail.com
wrote:
> To my taste, the fewer the cautions, the better.
Well, I'll agree with that up to a point--I'm just not sure I can
define precisely where that point is. Obviously the fewest number of
cautions you can have is zero, and I don't think that would make for a
very good race. It's pretty boring watching a strung out, single file
parade, which is what you can get very easily on long green flag
runs.
The other extreme is the Bristol of a couple years ago where there
would be in the neighborhood of 15-20 cautions in a 500 lap race.
That's one every 25-33 laps. When you're turning laps in about 15
seconds, that's a caution flag every 6-8 minutes. Not good.
I like enough cautions to make sure the race stays relatively close,
but not so many that they seem to be constantly interrupting the flow
of the event.
John McCoy
3c2779...@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com:
> Well, I'll agree with that up to a point--I'm just not sure I can
> define precisely where that point is. Obviously the fewest number of
> cautions you can have is zero, and I don't think that would make for a
> very good race. It's pretty boring watching a strung out, single file
> parade, which is what you can get very easily on long green flag
> runs.
That, tho, is more an effect of the car (CoT or aero), not the
lack of cautions. If a car running by itself didn't have an
advantage over two running together, then the field wouldn't be
so prone to seperate into 43 cars all running by themselves
(noting that that can't actually happen at Bristol, since there's
not enough space, but you get the idea).
John