NASCAR Weekend @ The Glen

Page 4 of 4 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: NASCAR Weekend @ The Glen

Post by Sparkz47 on Sun Aug 10, 2014 10:34 pm

Mother of Invention wrote:
Sparkz47 wrote:And now the announcers are already talking about changing the track. Even when everyone walks away completely unharmed we have to start a witch hunt.

why wait till someone dies, when you can prevent death.

There's a difference in taking reasonable precautions and remodeling an entire track based on a couple of big incidents. I heard a lot of drivers and media during the red flag talking ad nauseam about more run-off. In my opinion, racing needs unforgiving tracks. Otherwise, where's the punishment? To me, at least, racing loses a lot when a driver's only penalty for screwing up a corner is running over into more asphalt and losing a couple of seconds. I don't want to see anyone hurt, but crashes are a part of racing. A major part of racing is the fact that one slip up, and your car is a pile of trash.

Although the COT isn't everyone's cup of tea, no one doubts that it's safe. When you have these tanks of cars that have been proven to keep drivers uninjured in head-on collisions of at least 170mph, an ARMCO barrier close to the track is an acceptable risk. In my opinion, tracks should be unforgiving and push car and driver to the limit. I'm not a huge fan of run-offs the size of airstrips, slow-down chicanes, or penalties and blame being assigned for every unforeseen circumstance. I think that the major racing series have a duty to keep the level of danger within reason, but to also not strip racing of every little risk. Or else, what's the point?

Also, before the "Hi, Boozooka" comments start rolling in, I'm in full support of reasonable run-off to avoid ridiculous impacts or safety features such as tire or SAFER barriers. But, like I said above, the tough nature of tracks like the Glen (or Nordschleif, Bathurst, Indianapolis, etc.) further serves to showcase the skills of the competitors. As long as they're strapped in good and proper (as they are in the COT), some walls on either side won't be a major threat.

TL;DR - Keep it safe, but keep it tough

(Huh, I didn't really mean to make this mammoth of a post, but, well, there's my opinion on safety in motorsports for you.  Laughing )
avatar
Sparkz47
Champion
Champion

Posts : 1392
Join date : 2011-09-17
Age : 21
Location : Equestria

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: NASCAR Weekend @ The Glen

Post by Cynon on Sun Aug 10, 2014 11:37 pm

Sparkz47 wrote:
Mother of Invention wrote:
Sparkz47 wrote:And now the announcers are already talking about changing the track. Even when everyone walks away completely unharmed we have to start a witch hunt.

why wait till someone dies, when you can prevent death.

There's a difference in taking reasonable precautions and remodeling an entire track based on a couple of big incidents. I heard a lot of drivers and media during the red flag talking ad nauseam about more run-off. In my opinion, racing needs unforgiving tracks. Otherwise, where's the punishment? To me, at least, racing loses a lot when a driver's only penalty for screwing up a corner is running over into more asphalt and losing a couple of seconds. I don't want to see anyone hurt, but crashes are a part of racing. A major part of racing is the fact that one slip up, and your car is a pile of trash.  

Although the COT isn't everyone's cup of tea, no one doubts that it's safe. When you have these tanks of cars that have been proven to keep drivers uninjured in head-on collisions of at least 170mph, an ARMCO barrier close to the track is an acceptable risk. In my opinion, tracks should be unforgiving and push car and driver to the limit. I'm not a huge fan of run-offs the size of airstrips, slow-down chicanes, or penalties and blame being assigned for every unforeseen circumstance. I think that the major racing series have a duty to keep the level of danger within reason, but to also not strip racing of every little risk. Or else, what's the point?

Also, before the "Hi, Boozooka" comments start rolling in, I'm in full support of reasonable run-off to avoid ridiculous impacts or safety features such as tire or SAFER barriers. But, like I said above, the tough nature of tracks like the Glen (or Nordschleif, Bathurst, Indianapolis, etc.)  further serves to showcase the skills of the competitors. As long as they're strapped in good and proper (as they are in the COT), some walls on either side won't be a major threat.

TL;DR - Keep it safe, but keep it tough

(Huh, I didn't really mean to make this mammoth of a post, but, well, there's my opinion on safety in motorsports for you.  Laughing )

I'm really, really not a fan of huge amounts of runoff for the reasons you mentioned. That's why the news about the Parabolica made me die a little inside.

_________________
Effort Equals Results

Online Wins: 20
Last Win: Short Oval Challenge @ Sayre
EFR's #1 Robby Gordon fan
Nintendo ID (Wii U only): Cyriaan

Barton wrote:It has a McDonalds, so it might be a city.

Bob Ross wrote:Talent is a pursued interest. In other words, anything that you're willing to practice, you can do.

avatar
Cynon
Admin

Posts : 3086
Join date : 2011-08-05
Age : 28
Location : Chicago, Illinois

View user profile http://efr1.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: NASCAR Weekend @ The Glen

Post by PYLrulz on Mon Aug 11, 2014 2:34 am

Cynon wrote:
Sparkz47 wrote:
Mother of Invention wrote:
Sparkz47 wrote:And now the announcers are already talking about changing the track. Even when everyone walks away completely unharmed we have to start a witch hunt.

why wait till someone dies, when you can prevent death.

There's a difference in taking reasonable precautions and remodeling an entire track based on a couple of big incidents. I heard a lot of drivers and media during the red flag talking ad nauseam about more run-off. In my opinion, racing needs unforgiving tracks. Otherwise, where's the punishment? To me, at least, racing loses a lot when a driver's only penalty for screwing up a corner is running over into more asphalt and losing a couple of seconds. I don't want to see anyone hurt, but crashes are a part of racing. A major part of racing is the fact that one slip up, and your car is a pile of trash.  

Although the COT isn't everyone's cup of tea, no one doubts that it's safe. When you have these tanks of cars that have been proven to keep drivers uninjured in head-on collisions of at least 170mph, an ARMCO barrier close to the track is an acceptable risk. In my opinion, tracks should be unforgiving and push car and driver to the limit. I'm not a huge fan of run-offs the size of airstrips, slow-down chicanes, or penalties and blame being assigned for every unforeseen circumstance. I think that the major racing series have a duty to keep the level of danger within reason, but to also not strip racing of every little risk. Or else, what's the point?

Also, before the "Hi, Boozooka" comments start rolling in, I'm in full support of reasonable run-off to avoid ridiculous impacts or safety features such as tire or SAFER barriers. But, like I said above, the tough nature of tracks like the Glen (or Nordschleif, Bathurst, Indianapolis, etc.)  further serves to showcase the skills of the competitors. As long as they're strapped in good and proper (as they are in the COT), some walls on either side won't be a major threat.

TL;DR - Keep it safe, but keep it tough

(Huh, I didn't really mean to make this mammoth of a post, but, well, there's my opinion on safety in motorsports for you.  Laughing )

I'm really, really not a fan of huge amounts of runoff for the reasons you mentioned. That's why the news about the Parabolica made me die a little inside.

But on the flip side, if there is a pretty obvious safety flaw, why wait, or even claim "the cars are safe, nothing can happen".  These guys race at a high rate of speed.  All it can take is one tiny flaw, and you can have all the safety advancements in the world, it won't matter.

I'm actually quite surprised this type of thing hasn't happened at Sonoma yet, with that wall they kinda have jutting out there at the chute.

Watching the replay of the race, I say at the very least, if they insist on not running the boot, then get the tire wall out of there and just leave it as Armco barrier, nothing more.  No way you need a tire barrier there if the boot isn't being utilized.  Cars hitting that tire barrier there are going to kick out like that every time.
avatar
PYLrulz
Legend
Legend

Posts : 2050
Join date : 2011-08-06
Age : 33
Location : Mountville, PA

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: NASCAR Weekend @ The Glen

Post by SpeedDemon37 on Mon Aug 11, 2014 4:59 pm

Sparkz47 wrote:There's a difference in taking reasonable precautions and remodeling an entire track based on a couple of big incidents. I heard a lot of drivers and media during the red flag talking ad nauseam about more run-off. In my opinion, racing needs unforgiving tracks. Otherwise, where's the punishment? To me, at least, racing loses a lot when a driver's only penalty for screwing up a corner is running over into more asphalt and losing a couple of seconds. I don't want to see anyone hurt, but crashes are a part of racing. A major part of racing is the fact that one slip up, and your car is a pile of trash.  

Although the COT isn't everyone's cup of tea, no one doubts that it's safe. When you have these tanks of cars that have been proven to keep drivers uninjured in head-on collisions of at least 170mph, an ARMCO barrier close to the track is an acceptable risk. In my opinion, tracks should be unforgiving and push car and driver to the limit. I'm not a huge fan of run-offs the size of airstrips, slow-down chicanes, or penalties and blame being assigned for every unforeseen circumstance. I think that the major racing series have a duty to keep the level of danger within reason, but to also not strip racing of every little risk. Or else, what's the point?

Also, before the "Hi, Boozooka" comments start rolling in, I'm in full support of reasonable run-off to avoid ridiculous impacts or safety features such as tire or SAFER barriers. But, like I said above, the tough nature of tracks like the Glen (or Nordschleif, Bathurst, Indianapolis, etc.)  further serves to showcase the skills of the competitors. As long as they're strapped in good and proper (as they are in the COT), some walls on either side won't be a major threat.

TL;DR - Keep it safe, but keep it tough

(Huh, I didn't really mean to make this mammoth of a post, but, well, there's my opinion on safety in motorsports for you.  Laughing )
For the most part, I agree with this. But I suppose that an argument could also be made for the drivers who did not initially go off course that have been caught up in some of these nasty wrecks (McDowell yesterday, Gordon and Burton in 2009, etc.).

So I guess that I'm not quite sure what I think about this.
avatar
SpeedDemon37
Champion
Champion

Posts : 1611
Join date : 2012-05-11
Age : 20
Location : Michigan, USA

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: NASCAR Weekend @ The Glen

Post by Sparkz47 on Mon Aug 11, 2014 5:17 pm

SpeedDemon37 wrote:
Sparkz47 wrote:There's a difference in taking reasonable precautions and remodeling an entire track based on a couple of big incidents. I heard a lot of drivers and media during the red flag talking ad nauseam about more run-off. In my opinion, racing needs unforgiving tracks. Otherwise, where's the punishment? To me, at least, racing loses a lot when a driver's only penalty for screwing up a corner is running over into more asphalt and losing a couple of seconds. I don't want to see anyone hurt, but crashes are a part of racing. A major part of racing is the fact that one slip up, and your car is a pile of trash.  

Although the COT isn't everyone's cup of tea, no one doubts that it's safe. When you have these tanks of cars that have been proven to keep drivers uninjured in head-on collisions of at least 170mph, an ARMCO barrier close to the track is an acceptable risk. In my opinion, tracks should be unforgiving and push car and driver to the limit. I'm not a huge fan of run-offs the size of airstrips, slow-down chicanes, or penalties and blame being assigned for every unforeseen circumstance. I think that the major racing series have a duty to keep the level of danger within reason, but to also not strip racing of every little risk. Or else, what's the point?

Also, before the "Hi, Boozooka" comments start rolling in, I'm in full support of reasonable run-off to avoid ridiculous impacts or safety features such as tire or SAFER barriers. But, like I said above, the tough nature of tracks like the Glen (or Nordschleif, Bathurst, Indianapolis, etc.)  further serves to showcase the skills of the competitors. As long as they're strapped in good and proper (as they are in the COT), some walls on either side won't be a major threat.

TL;DR - Keep it safe, but keep it tough

(Huh, I didn't really mean to make this mammoth of a post, but, well, there's my opinion on safety in motorsports for you.  Laughing )
But I suppose that an argument could also be made for the drivers who did not initially go off course that have been caught up in some of these nasty wrecks (McDowell yesterday, Gordon and Burton in 2009, etc.).

So I guess that I'm not quite sure what I think about this.

If it's fine when it happens on an oval, why is it suddenly wrong on a road course?
avatar
Sparkz47
Champion
Champion

Posts : 1392
Join date : 2011-09-17
Age : 21
Location : Equestria

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: NASCAR Weekend @ The Glen

Post by SpeedDemon37 on Mon Aug 11, 2014 5:22 pm

Sparkz47 wrote:
SpeedDemon37 wrote:
Sparkz47 wrote:There's a difference in taking reasonable precautions and remodeling an entire track based on a couple of big incidents. I heard a lot of drivers and media during the red flag talking ad nauseam about more run-off. In my opinion, racing needs unforgiving tracks. Otherwise, where's the punishment? To me, at least, racing loses a lot when a driver's only penalty for screwing up a corner is running over into more asphalt and losing a couple of seconds. I don't want to see anyone hurt, but crashes are a part of racing. A major part of racing is the fact that one slip up, and your car is a pile of trash.  

Although the COT isn't everyone's cup of tea, no one doubts that it's safe. When you have these tanks of cars that have been proven to keep drivers uninjured in head-on collisions of at least 170mph, an ARMCO barrier close to the track is an acceptable risk. In my opinion, tracks should be unforgiving and push car and driver to the limit. I'm not a huge fan of run-offs the size of airstrips, slow-down chicanes, or penalties and blame being assigned for every unforeseen circumstance. I think that the major racing series have a duty to keep the level of danger within reason, but to also not strip racing of every little risk. Or else, what's the point?

Also, before the "Hi, Boozooka" comments start rolling in, I'm in full support of reasonable run-off to avoid ridiculous impacts or safety features such as tire or SAFER barriers. But, like I said above, the tough nature of tracks like the Glen (or Nordschleif, Bathurst, Indianapolis, etc.)  further serves to showcase the skills of the competitors. As long as they're strapped in good and proper (as they are in the COT), some walls on either side won't be a major threat.

TL;DR - Keep it safe, but keep it tough

(Huh, I didn't really mean to make this mammoth of a post, but, well, there's my opinion on safety in motorsports for you.  Laughing )
But I suppose that an argument could also be made for the drivers who did not initially go off course that have been caught up in some of these nasty wrecks (McDowell yesterday, Gordon and Burton in 2009, etc.).

So I guess that I'm not quite sure what I think about this.

If it's fine when it happens on an oval, why is it suddenly wrong on a road course?
Ah, good point.
avatar
SpeedDemon37
Champion
Champion

Posts : 1611
Join date : 2012-05-11
Age : 20
Location : Michigan, USA

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: NASCAR Weekend @ The Glen

Post by crl on Mon Aug 11, 2014 11:09 pm

Does anyone recall an IndyCar driver having a nasty impact with the Armco at The Glen?

_________________
Norah O'Donnell - the only reason to watch CBS This Morning.
Josef Newgarden's #1 Tennessee-based EFR fan.
EFR's #1 fan of Karen Gillan and Milana Vayntrub.
avatar
crl
Legend
Legend

Posts : 2518
Join date : 2011-08-06
Age : 31
Location : Nashville, TN

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: NASCAR Weekend @ The Glen

Post by bigdc48 on Tue Aug 12, 2014 1:50 am

crl wrote:Does anyone recall an IndyCar driver having a nasty impact with the Armco at The Glen?

avatar
bigdc48
Regular Contender
Regular Contender

Posts : 909
Join date : 2012-10-05
Age : 24
Location : Manchester, NH (near Boston)

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 4 of 4 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum