Oval Racing Skills People Need to Know

Because oval racing is never easy, I'm opening this thread to talk about what skills are needed to run around oval courses. I'm not going to be surprised if I get comments in this thread saying "just go around in a circle" or "just turn left." While that's the basic viewpoint of oval racing, it's not fully what is needed to win in oval racing. So that's why I'm turning over attention to you all in what you would suggest oval racers should follow to compete in oval racing competition.

I will begin with some of my comments, then you all follow along and offer your comments.

The way I've understood oval racing, you want to be able to try to use smooth steering on the straights. You don't want to create mad amounts of wind resistance while at speed. As I do in Gran Turismo 4, I try to join a leading driver's slipstream and then blast past if I have just enough to get past another car. Because of my road racing mentality, I usually try to stay on the far outside on the straights and to the far inside in the corners. We don't have too many ovals in America that seem more like road courses. Some non-American (and maybe even non-Canadian) tracks are styled a bit like road courses. I can remember Rockingham (in England; is it still in service?) when (then) CART and ASCAR raced around the British oval. It's styled like a road course since one or two corners are pretty sharp for an oval course. You then have the Lausitzring in Germany that has grass on the far outside. The Lausitzring is more like a road course that thinks it's an oval. It makes a wonderful course for the infield road course raced by the DTM (I learned that "Meisterschaft" means "championship"). There is also the oval in the greater Rio de Janerio oval in Brazil that has kind of a trapezoid design of a layout. And finally, there is the Twin Ring Motegi Superspeedway where Turns 3 and 4 are more like a road course because you have to brake hard and watch your line.

Fact of the matter is that you want to try and keep up as much speed as possible and make smooth moves at speed. Racing on short tracks is different. I've learned from "rFactor" and the "NASCAR Racing" series by Sierra/Papyrus about this. It seems like the best way to tackle a short track is to treat it like a road course. I don't think there's a short track you can just ride around like it's super-short Talladega. Not Hickory. Not Myrtle Beach. Not Indianapolis Raceway Park (O'Reilly Raceway Park nowadays). Not Lanier Speedway (featured in "Forza Motorsport Showdown" on Speed). Not the very popular (especially with drifters) Irwindale Speedway. I think one of my favorite short tracks is Flemington Speedway for its unique design. It's kind of like a small Indianapolis, only with closer walls. And as I just learned, the track shut down in 2000.

- I can't comment on dirt ovals because I'm horribly inexperienced. -

Oval racing may seem easy, but it really isn't. Any of you want to share some oval racing advice to those who take on the challenge of oval racing?

Skills? What skills?









I'm sorry, but I find oval racing a total waste whether it is hard or not. Dice stacking competitions are more entertaining - literally. However, Thats my opinion, maybe you can enlighten me as to what skills are involved.

I can see why the stadium style venues are popular for spectators - most other traditional road courses offer the punters no more than a perhaps 20% view of what's happening on track at any time. So for that reason ovals, and therefore oval racing, are good spectator sports. As for driving skills, well it's an almost completely different game to road course racing. There is a certain amount of cross-over between the two obviously, but in general good oval skills might not translate to good 'traditional' circuit racing. Having said that, i could produce a good sized list off the top of my head, of drivers who've started their careers 'turning just left' but gone on to great things in other disciplines.

John

Fact of the matter is that you want to try and keep up as much speed as possible and make smooth moves at speed

Click to expand...

I would say that this is extremely important in any form of motorsport, not just ovals.

The best way on a short track is slow in (off the gas) and fast out(hard on the gas).On short track(less than a 1/2 mile)your braking point is very important as to the way the car goes through the corner.If you miss the brake point,it will mess up your car and you cannot get back on the gas as fast as you want.You want to get back on the gas at the apex of the turn,even if it is banked.This is just like road racing.This is why a driver running ovals can move over to road racing and be respectable in thier lap times.On the big ovals,it is more car set up that gets you around fast.At Daytona they don't lift off the gas for the turns if the cars settup is on the money.

First, Oval Racing not entertaining? Oval racing has produced the best finishes ever. I can only remember 2 good road racing finish for the last 10 years. Recently at Sebring (GT2 battle) and the Cart race at portland way back when

One of the Greatest finishes in Motorsports history- watch 2 drivers basicly use their cars to fight eachother physically to the finish line



More stunning, dramatic, exciting oval racing finishes:

2007 Daytona 500 finish - incredible finish



2000 Michigan 500 finish. Watched this live, I was nearly shaking the whole time



EDIT: Found that good roadcourse finish at Portland (CART)



Juan Montoya. Remember him? One of Formula 1's top drivers.

Now he is in NASCAR, you know, the just turn left and floor it series? He should dominate, right? Not exactly. He has frequently commented on how tough it is to drive ovals, and at times saying it was tougher than driving a Formula 1 car on roadcourses. Is he just BSing? I doubt it. He wouldn't be 25th in NASCAR points if NASCAR's ovals were easy to drive.

As for Formula 1's hero, Michael Schumacher, I would like to see him race NASCAR and get his head handed to him on a platter.

I race the PC game NASCAR 2003 online very frequently. The skill levels of the drivers is enormous. Even on a flatout track like Daytona the qualifying times guys put down are incredible. You have to be incredibly smooth.

The difficulty increases dramaticly on tracks like the flat 1 mile oval at Phoenix, the egg shapped 'old lady' at Darlington, or even the world's fastest half mile Bristol or the half mile hairpin at Martinsville.

I challenge anyone who thinks oval racing is easy to race NR2003 and try to stay within .500 of the pace of the top drivers.

What makes it so difficult?

When Montoya drove his first stock car, he told former NASCAR champ Rusty Wallace the car wasy WAY too loose. But when Rusty drove it he said the car was TIGHT.

That's the point. Not only are NASCARs 3500 LB 850 HP beasts with the same size tires on the front and back and absolutley ZERO computers, they have to be setup extremely asymmetric in order to corner at competitive speeds.

With most road racing cars once you have a setup it will usually work for most tracks with usually gearing the only change needed. Juan Montoya said that himself. But with NASCAR, the ovals are so vastly different there is no one magical setup. Unlike some race series you can't just tell your mechanic to plug his laptop into the car and make it have less understeer.

Not to mention on road courses you are usually running laps by yourself, but on ovals traffic is usually a common problem. Unlike F1, cars in NASCAR are not told to move out of the way.

Oval racing and road racing are two different types of racing. Both have their own unique set of challenges.

Good drivers are good at both oval and road racing. NASCAR stars Jeff Gordon, Kurt Busch, Tony Stewart, Mark Martin (when he was younger) to just name a few are very good on ovals and road courses. That is something rare and special.

How about sprint cars? How does sliding 1,000HP beast with a short wheel base around a dirt oval sound? Easy? If you think so think again.

The final point is people knock on oval racing because you just turn left. If they made a figure 8 track that featured right and left turns would that make it any tougher?

The point is good drivers can run ovals and road courses with equal speed.

I am yet to see a top NASCAR driver who is junk at the 2 roadcourses the series runs at

The challenges of a road course is no higher than the challenges of a tough oval. Juan Montoya has already wrecked half a dozen cars driving by himself on the so called easier ovals. The only difference is you have to turn right on roadcourses. That's really it.

In many ways oval racing is tougher than road course racing

So oval racers have skill people need to know

Earth

With most road racing cars once you have a setup it will usually work for most tracks with usually gearing the only change needed. Juan Montoya said that himself. But with NASCAR, the ovals are so vastly different there is no one magical setup. Unlike some race series you can't just tell your mechanic to plug his laptop into the car and make it have less understeer.

Click to expand...

I would like like to see proof of JPM stating that. If this is true, then I understand why he left F1!

Every track has its own features that needs to be adressed with the setups. That is true for all tracks! If anyone thinks that the same setup can be used for Monza and Valencia (or in NASCAR lingua: Talladega and Martinsville), they have little or no understanding of racing at all.

I´ve never watched an ovalrace "alive in the flesh" so to speak, so I can only refer to it via TV, and ovalracing through your TVscreen is just plain boooooooooriiiiing! I think that is how most people refer to it though - they´ve never went on a race for real. I´m pretty sure it would be great fun watching it from a grandstand instead of a sofa.

Earth

First, Oval Racing not entertaining? Oval racing has produced the best finishes ever. I can only remember 2 good road racing finish for the last 10 years. Recently at Sebring (GT2 battle) and the Cart race at portland way back when

One of the Greatest finishes in Motorsports history- watch 2 drivers basicly use their cars to fight eachother physically to the finish line

Click to expand...

Your exciting race finishes here have been artificially created by yellow flags, effectively leaving the race as a 2-3 lap sprint. Any race will be exciting and close in a situation like that, especially on an open track like an oval.

And the main excitement in the 2007 Daytona 500 finish seems to be the huge crash at the end.

Earth

Juan Montoya. Remember him? One of Formula 1's top drivers.

Now he is in NASCAR, you know, the just turn left and floor it series? He should dominate, right? Not exactly. He has frequently commented on how tough it is to drive ovals, and at times saying it was tougher than driving a Formula 1 car on roadcourses. Is he just BSing? I doubt it. He wouldn't be 25th in NASCAR points if NASCAR's ovals were easy to drive.

As for Formula 1's hero, Michael Schumacher, I would like to see him race NASCAR and get his head handed to him on a platter.

more NASCAR stuff.

Click to expand...

I'm not quite getting your point here. The topic is about oval racing, not just NASCAR. JPM proved in CART that he can race on ovals, as one of your videos shows. His current problems are more related to NASCAR than to the oval track.

I think an integral part of this thread would likely to be with Layla's Keeper and talk about what racing those modifieds and super-modifieds are like on short ovals and dirt tracks.

Earth has some great points on oval racing. The first YouTube video was Darlington 2003 (or 2002?). It's a memorable finish. Memorable for me was the 1999 oval race at Michigan run by (then) CART. Max Papis was all out to win when he ran out of fuel on the final lap. I think he was crying with his radio transmission. He handed over the lead to Michael Andretti as he took on Juan Pablo Montoya for the race win, and Michael Andretti edged out J.P. Montoya.

Carry on oval racing and oval racing skill discussion.

Earth

I can only remember 2 good road racing finish for the last 10 years. Recently at Sebring (GT2 battle) and the Cart race at portland way back when

Click to expand...

In which case all I can say is that you certainly have not seen anywhere near enough road racing. I attended a club level meeting at my local track this week and saw a number of good finishes. However personally I'm just as interested in seeing good close racing for the entire duration of a race, something that all forms of motorsport are capable of providing.

Earth

Juan Montoya. Remember him? One of Formula 1's top drivers.

Click to expand...

Yeas I remember him well, and would not describe him as one of F1s top drivers (top pie eaters yes, drivers no), JPM was capable of some great performances at times. However he was also hideously inconsistent and prone to mistakes that were well below his supposed level of experience, often throwing away races in the process.

Earth

Now he is in NASCAR, you know, the just turn left and floor it series? He should dominate, right? Not exactly. He has frequently commented on how tough it is to drive ovals, and at times saying it was tougher than driving a Formula 1 car on roadcourses. Is he just BSing? I doubt it. He wouldn't be 25th in NASCAR points if NASCAR's ovals were easy to drive.

Click to expand...

Well duh, he is trying to promote himself within NASCAR, he's hardly going to stand up and announce to the fans that its a walk in the park and he doesn't know what the fuss is about. Its a small matter of marketing himself.

Earth

As for Formula 1's hero, Michael Schumacher, I would like to see him race NASCAR and get his head handed to him on a platter.

Click to expand...

Unlikely to happen by simple virtue of MS retiring, this is however rather sticky ground as it could well open a rather good debate on the number of drivers who have moved from road racing to oval racing and done rather well.

Do I need to mention a British bloke by the name of Dan Wheldon, started out here in the UK racing on road circuits (track racing as we normally call it) and has done rather well if I recall on those ovals.

Earth

With most road racing cars once you have a setup it will usually work for most tracks with usually gearing the only change needed. Juan Montoya said that himself. But with NASCAR, the ovals are so vastly different there is no one magical setup. Unlike some race series you can't just tell your mechanic to plug his laptop into the car and make it have less understeer.

Click to expand...

I would love to see a direct quote from JPM saying that, because to be rather blunt its utter rubbish. No major set up change when racing at tracks as diverse as Le Mans, Nurburgring, Silverstone, Fuji, Sebring, etc.

Sorry but that is utter and complete rubbish.

No car will allow you to simply "plug his laptop into the car and make it have less understeer.", all telemetry data will allow you to do is discover what a car is doing. Yes in some series a degree of remote access to cap rev limits is possible (and the number of race series that allow this is very few), the vast majority of road racing series allow no outside interference or telemetry of the car once its running. In addition if you think that the likes of NASCAR and other oval series don't make use of all the available technology during design and testing then you are seriously mistaken.

Earth

Not to mention on road courses you are usually running laps by yourself, but on ovals traffic is usually a common problem. Unlike F1, cars in NASCAR are not told to move out of the way.

Click to expand...

Again you seem to have rather a limited range of experience if you think its common to run by yourself in road/track racing. In regard to your F1 comment, keep in mind that in F1 they don't have spotters letting them know the position of every other car on the track, and we don't pack up and go home if it rains.

Earth

Oval racing and road racing are two different types of racing. Both have their own unique set of challenges.

Click to expand...

The first unbiased and sensible thing you have said so far in this post.

Earth

Good drivers are good at both oval and road racing. NASCAR stars Jeff Gordon, Kurt Busch, Tony Stewart, Mark Martin (when he was younger) to just name a few are very good on ovals and road courses. That is something rare and special.

Click to expand...

While I would agree with your first sentence, that you then only go on to list NASCAR drivers does display a bias here.

Earth

How about sprint cars? How does sliding 1,000HP beast with a short wheel base around a dirt oval sound? Easy? If you think so think again.

Click to expand...

How about bike racing on a short dirt oval with machines that weigh in at less than 80kilos, will hit 60mph in around 2.5 seconds and by the regulations are not allowed to have brakes fitted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorcycle_speedway

Earth

The challenges of a road course is no higher than the challenges of a tough oval. Juan Montoya has already wrecked half a dozen cars driving by himself on the so called easier ovals. The only difference is you have to turn right on roadcourses. That's really it.

Click to expand...

Again I would have to disagree, the differences between road courses and ovals is a great deal more than simply adding in a few right turns. Speeds tend to be far higher on an oval and a lot less room for error exists, while surface smoothness and elevation changes are generally much more of an issue on road courses.

Earth

In many ways oval racing is tougher than road course racing

So oval racers have skill people need to know

Click to expand...

And in many other ways road racing is tougher that oval racing.


I have to close by saying that your post smacks of a massive amount of bias, almost dismissing road racing out of hand as requiring less skill, less variety, fewer close races, etc. Now I understand that you may have taken offence to a few of the early posts in this thread, but your own reply is no less biased that those (and I would argue given the detail (much of which is simply not accurate) more so). To try and claim that one branch of motorsport is superior to another in terms of skill is quite simply ridiculous. The skill sets involved are wildly different, as are the demands placed on the drivers, cars, designers and engineers. I fully understand your desire to defend oval racing, but the end result has (for me) seen you come across as borderline offensive in terms of roadracing.

John’s intention for this thread (as far as I have read it) is to discuss the differing skills required for oval racing, not to start a flame war about which requires more skill. That will result in little more than bad feeling and a rapidly locked thread.

Regards

Scaff

I think age is also a factor... while oval racing has drivers well into their 50s, it's almost unheard of that a F1 driver will keep on racing after he's 38. F1 needs faster reflexes, while in ovals (mostly Nascar) it's just gliding between 3rd and 4th gear and flooring it, it would seem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Earth
Not to mention on road courses you are usually running laps by yourself, but on ovals traffic is usually a common problem. Unlike F1, cars in NASCAR are not told to move out of the way.

Scaff

Again you seem to have rather a limited range of experience if you think its common to run by yourself in road/track racing. In regard to your F1 comment, keep in mind that in F1 they don't have spotters letting them know the position of every other car on the track, and we don't pack up and go home if it rains.

Click to expand...

I would like to mention the different Le Mans series here (ALMS, LMS and JLMC), where no fewer than four different classes of cars (LMP1, LMP2, GT1 and GT2) race at the same time at the same track. This causes frequent traffic throughout the entire lenght of the race (usually 2hrs 45min in ALMS, 1000km or 6hrs in LMS, no idea for JLMC), since all classes are different in terms of speed and handling. LMP1 is usually the fastest, then LMP2, GT1 and last GT2. Of course the slower cars are blueflagged, but usually things get pretty tight anyway. And considering a startingfield of almost 30 cars for ALMS, and 57(!) for LMS, there is always something going on on the track.
I´m just pointing out that traffic is truly an issue in roadracing aswell as NASCAR.
As for F1, the differences in speed between the top teams and the backmarkers are vast, so lapping is a contiuous process the whole race.

On rain tires comments....even the best rain tire will hydroplane at oval track cornering speeds (commonly above 160 MPH). If they could run in the rain safely, they would, but they can't, so they won't.

How about running around a track nearly the whole way in a four wheel drift? And being faster than someone who isn't. Don't give me Touge as an example, either. and WRC. You don't even drift on the straights.

Only at the 1/4 and 1/2 mile bullrings would you find that sort of action. I remember reading about a circular 1mi dirt track in Langhorne, Pennsylvania. You had to drive the entire race distance in a four wheel drift, and in those days, it was a 2-or-more ton family car with no power steering. Or a dangerously light Offy-powered sprint car with no rollcage.

F1 takes skill, too, but it's more reflexes and engineering (yes, I said it. the engineers who build these things are as important as the drivers.) than anything else. You don't even have to deal with a clutch, and if it does lose traction, you can't save it, though you almost never have to worry about that. It's like a F-22, all tech, all meant for outperforming the other guy.

A stock car is more like the good old P-47. Yes, it's heavy, and it takes a bit more muscling around to drive. It's somewhat forgiving, (though not much) very durable, (You don't see a formula car rubbing sidepods, or one goes flying.) and It's a more raw, simplistic driving experience. Oh, on those two aoccasions NASCAR runs on road courses, rain tires ARE allowed. It's just never rained on Sunday.

Indy's somewhere between the two, a F14, perhaps. Nowadays, they're more or less spec racers, but they've still been quite exciting, even with multiple engine manufacturers. They don't use rain tires on ovals, cornering takes place WELL over 180MPH, I guarantee, if there were such banked turns in F1 (think return to the original Monza or AVUS '37) you wouldn't see rain races. perhaps when someone thinks of a tire that can make a hard, banked turn at 160+ in wet weather, we'll see Oval rain races.

I personally think Formula 1 cars should be much larger, about the size of Indy or Champ cars. They'd be safer, and, perhaps, a bit more exciting to watch. (As in, Passes at the front of the pack, not just lapping. Lapping is boring. there's no real race there.)

My personal favorite category is Touring Car racing, especially the Aussie V8s. Big cars that don't handle Great, but not bad either, produce close racing, plenty of punting, fender rubbing. If I remember right, Nigel Mansell ran BTCC in the late '90s. How'd he do?

((No, seriously, How'd he do? I dont' know...))

So nobody got anything on dirt ovals? Ill be back in a while to explain, so wait a little while and see the difference

Jim Prower

My personal favorite category is Touring Car racing, especially the Aussie V8s. Big cars that don't handle Great, but not bad either, produce close racing, plenty of punting, fender rubbing. If I remember right, Nigel Mansell ran BTCC in the late '90s. How'd he do?

((No, seriously, How'd he do? I dont' know...))

Click to expand...

How did the man that mastered both track and oval open wheel racing do when it came to touring cars? Not that great would be the answer, from Wiki...

Wiki

Mansell made a return to racing in 1998 in the British Touring Car Championship, driving in a Ford Mondeo for three rounds. As it was, the Ford was highly uncompetitive - the manufacturer finished the season 7th out of 8 in the championship. With the number 5 already taken by James Thompson, Mansell raced with the red number 55.[14][15]

At his first event at Donington Park, he retired 3 laps into the sprint race, meaning he would start the feature race in 19th position on the grid. As the conditions changed and the track got wetter, Mansell found himself leading the race for several laps and he finished in 5th position.[16] The race was regarded by many fans as one of the greatest in touring car history.[17]

It was to be his best finish in the series, as he failed to finish either race at the next round he participated in at Brands Hatch, and at his final race at Silverstone he finished in 14th and 11th place.[18][19] Having competed in 3 of the 13 rounds, he finished 18th out of 21 in the drivers championship.[20]

Click to expand...

Source - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigel_Mansell#British_Touring_Car_Championship

...now from that we could conclude two posiable things. Either the BTCC requires far more skill that anything he had raced in before or that the skill sets required are so totally different that its neither easy or valid to compare differing forms of motorsport in this way.

In my mind its the latter of those two, differing disciplines require differing skills (in all areas as I said before) which makes any argument about which requires more skill totally pointless.


Regards

Scaff

Jim Prower

...If I remember right, Nigel Mansell ran BTCC in the late '90s. How'd he do?

((No, seriously, How'd he do? I dont' know...))

Click to expand...

I seem to remember (having been there on the day with our race series supporting the BTCC at that time) watching Mansell crash into the old bridge at Donington not 100 meters away from where i was standing - he didn't look particularly great that day

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2069398462945632616&q=BTCC+Crash&hl=en

Scaff

...now from that we could conclude two posiable things. Either the BTCC requires far more skill that anything he had raced in before or that the skill sets required are so totally different that its neither easy or valid to compare differing forms of motorsport in this way.

Click to expand...

Exactly. Even Andy Rouse, a modern day touring car legend, had trouble adapting when the series changed and he had to go from a 500bhp RWD Ford Sierra to a 300bhp FWD Ford Mondeo, so I'd imagine it'd be an even bigger jump for Mansell.

daan

Exactly. Even Andy Rouse, a modern day touring car legend, had trouble adapting when the series changed and he had to go from a 500bhp RWD Ford Sierra to a 300bhp FWD Ford Mondeo, so I'd imagine it'd be an even bigger jump for Mansell.

Click to expand...

I doubt it, whinging about an F1 car takes the same ability as whinging about a 2ltr Touring Car - the skills are totally transferable 👍

Scaff

How did the man that mastered both track and oval open wheel racing do when it came to touring cars? Not that great would be the answer, from Wiki...


Source - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigel_Mansell#British_Touring_Car_Championship

...now from that we could conclude two posiable things. Either the BTCC requires far more skill that anything he had raced in before or that the skill sets required are so totally different that its neither easy or valid to compare differing forms of motorsport in this way.

In my mind its the latter of those two, differing disciplines require differing skills (in all areas as I said before) which makes any argument about which requires more skill totally pointless.


Regards

Scaff

Click to expand...

Well, in that case, Is the skill set less Oval Vs Road Course, and More Open-Wheel VS Fendered?

Think about it, Much of this discussion centers around F1 VS NASCAR. Obviously, because those are the two most popular forms of racing int heir respective countries. But is NASCAR really more closely related to Touring Car racing?

We've seen F1 guys translate themselves to Indy quite well, (and, in the case of the Super Mario Andretti, Vice-versa. JPM...sort of.) But, given that F1 guys have trouble with low-downforce cars, and Stock car (and Touring car) drivers seem to have trouble in cars with more downforce than if God himself were pressing the cars down on the track, (Remember, Tony Stewart had a So-So career in IRL before switching to NASCAR) perhaps this is really the argument.

And, perhaps this is all about where you start. If your first racer above Karts is a Formula Ford, perhaps you're destined for winged wonders. If it's a Midget, perhaps Stockers are your thing. A street-driven Mini Cooper? the next great Touring Car Champion?

TheCracker

I doubt it, whinging about an F1 car takes the same ability as whinging about a 2ltr Touring Car - the skills are totally transferable 👍

Click to expand...

hehe

Jim Prower

We've seen F1 guys translate themselves to Indy quite well, (and, in the case of the Super Mario Andretti,

Click to expand...

No fair! You're not allowed to bring Mario into this. He's driven everything, everywhere, quickly.

the only issue I have is that Nascar is indeed US-based, but F1 is rest-of-the-world-based

Jim Prower

And, perhaps this is all about where you start. If your first racer above Karts is a Formula Ford, perhaps you're destined for winged wonders. If it's a Midget, perhaps Stockers are your thing. A street-driven Mini Cooper? the next great Touring Car Champion?

Click to expand...

If you grow up in the southern US states and begin your racing career in Midgets or late model stock cars then you are probably going to be aiming for NASCAR, perhaps IRL if you are feel like branching out. Anywhere else in the world and you start your career in karts then your ultimate goal is likely to be F1. Drivers are drawn to NASCAR because of money there to be made from it. Top flight NASCAR drivers wouldn't stick around if the $$$ just wasn't available - they'd have tried their skills on a bigger stage. I doubt any of the current crop of BTCC, WTCC or even DTM drivers started in 'Minis' or the like. They'll have started in karts, again aiming for F1 glory. It's only when single seater oppotunities began drying up for them that they took a sideways step into touring cars. The same could probably be said for most Sportscar drivers.

V8 Supercars tends to follow the NASCAR model of being the most obvious route for drivers from a certain region, namely Australia and New Zealand, wher other options are less easy or less appealing for the young driver.

I guess you make sense there. Good points.

Jim Prower

Well, in that case, Is the skill set less Oval Vs Road Course, and More Open-Wheel VS Fendered?

Click to expand...

While I still think that its a difficult thing to judge I would agree that on the whole the skill sets are more split between Open and Closed wheel motorsports.

Jim Prower

And, perhaps this is all about where you start. If your first racer above Karts is a Formula Ford, perhaps you're destined for winged wonders. If it's a Midget, perhaps Stockers are your thing. A street-driven Mini Cooper? the next great Touring Car Champion?

Click to expand...

I do honestly think its a good indicator of the general direction you will head in, but its certainly not unusual to jump from one to the other before settling. You also missed out one rather large area for motorsport and that's the subject of rallying, again a totally different group of skills to either open or closed wheel racing.

However its also arguable that the jump from Formula Ford to a 'wings and slicks' car is as big a jump as you would get from open to closed wheel. After all you go from zero downforce to huge levels of downforce, yet its still open wheel (and plenty of people make this jump). The same could be argued in a jump from FWD touring cars (in the lower club levels) to a RWD mid-engined GT car, still closed wheel but again a major jump in the required skills.


You do also get certain people who are naturally quick no matter what type of car you put them in, but these are on the whole rather few and far between.


Regards

Scaff

Scaff

While I still think that its a difficult thing to judge I would agree that on the whole the skill sets are more split between Open and Closed wheel motorsports.




I do honestly think its a good indicator of the general direction you will head in, but its certainly not unusual to jump from one to the other before settling. You also missed out one rather large area for motorsport and that's the subject of rallying, again a totally different group of skills to either open or closed wheel racing.

However its also arguable that the jump from Formula Ford to a 'wings and slicks' car is as big a jump as you would get from open to closed wheel. After all you go from zero downforce to huge levels of downforce, yet its still open wheel (and plenty of people make this jump). The same could be argued in a jump from FWD touring cars (in the lower club levels) to a RWD mid-engined GT car, still closed wheel but again a major jump in the required skills.


You do also get certain people who are naturally quick no matter what type of car you put them in, but these are on the whole rather few and far between.


Regards

Scaff

Click to expand...

That's true. Even going Busch to Cup, or (a bit more obviously) Current "Speedway" stock car to "Car of Tomorrow," there's an adjustment, although cars are more or less built the same way. Listen to the complaints. Even within a "genre" cars can be extremely different.

So, I guess the endall of the F1 VS NASCAR argument (and any other type of racing thrown in) is that they require very different skills, and the person who can adjust absurdly quickly is more or less your Mario Andretti.

Or Jim Clark. F1, Touring Cars, NASCAR, INDY 500, F2, Rallying, Le Mans - makes Mario appear like a one trick pony.

On the subject of dirt ovals, I may have a hard time to explain this, but, I think that my video will explain it.




If you have ever driven in snow, its kind of like dirt. You have to "throw" the car around to get it to turn. Depending on what kind of dirt (yes, it matters) you either have to drive the car in deep and make a kind of diamond shape out of the track, or you have to keep your foot in it and ride the cushion. Now if you dont know what that means, the black lines are "the bottom" and the red is the cushion:



Straightaways are s little different, you want to drive (where there are no cars of course) where ever the fastest line is, which varies from track to track. Some tracks you drive in a circle, some an oval, and maybe even a diamond when.


I come back later when I can think of more..

I'm to the point where I consider drifting and opendriver19a's dirt racing more of a sport than Nascrap (oval racing).

When you have 2/3 the field crash at the end of a race that isn't racing... Not to mention all the other syncronized crashes into the wall during the race...

Keichi Tsuchiya

Skills? What skills?

I'm sorry, but I find oval racing a total waste whether it is hard or not. Dice stacking competitions are more entertaining - literally. However, Thats my opinion, maybe you can enlighten me as to what skills are involved.

Click to expand...

Again pretty much argree...

Earth

First, Oval Racing not entertaining? Oval racing has produced the best finishes ever. I can only remember 2 good road racing finish for the last 10 years. Recently at Sebring (GT2 battle) and the Cart race at portland way back when

One of the Greatest finishes in Motorsports history- watch 2 drivers basicly use their cars to fight eachother physically to the finish line

Click to expand...

Again... Those arn't finishes. I don't know what you'd call them but it's definitely not racing.

Earth

Juan Montoya. Remember him? One of Formula 1's top drivers.

Now he is in NASCAR, you know, the just turn left and floor it series? He should dominate, right? Not exactly. He has frequently commented on how tough it is to drive ovals, and at times saying it was tougher than driving a Formula 1 car on roadcourses. Is he just BSing? I doubt it. He wouldn't be 25th in NASCAR points if NASCAR's ovals were easy to drive.

As for Formula 1's hero, Michael Schumacher, I would like to see him race NASCAR and get his head handed to him on a platter.

Click to expand...

He couldn't win because he sucked and whined so much like Tony Stuart so he went below his skillz to pick on all the "white folks".

Earth

That's the point. Not only are NASCARs 3500 LB 850 HP beasts with the same size tires on the front and back and absolutley ZERO computers, they have to be setup extremely asymmetric in order to corner at competitive speeds.

Click to expand...

The computers actually should be implanted in the brains of the drivers and called Ego restricter plates or something...

-Diego-

the only issue I have is that Nascar is indeed US-based, but F1 is rest-of-the-world-based

Click to expand...

There's a reason for that... And why I like things that are not solely US-based...

Well DWA, if you think NASCAR isn't a sport and not racing, then that's you. But the truth is oval racing, especially at the NASCAR level, takes a great degree of skill.

Didn't Montoya sit on a few poles and win in his rookie F1 season?

He's not exactly doing that in NASCAR

so your point is that it takes more skill to be a Nascar driver than it takes to be a F1 driver?

alrighty... say hello to everyone in FOS-land

For the *fingers crossed* last time: F1 and NASCAR are not comparable in terms of skill!
They are vastly different in almost all ways. Just about the only common thing is that they do have four wheels. It is very much a case of apples and oranges.
A great NASCAR driver is not automatically good at F1 and vice versa!