The idea of multi-car qualifying is nothing new to motorsports.  Our readers who follow Formula 1 racing (or other open wheel series) know what I’m talking about.  It is however, a fairly new system for NASCAR.  We’ve seen the Nationwide Series use the process for road course races over the last few years, and this season the Truck Series has used it at Pocono and will again use it at Kentucky this weekend.  CBS Sports reported on Thursday that NASCAR may be considering implementing multi-car qualifying for both the NNS and Cup Series on a regular basis.  Is anyone else wondering why?

It appears that the main reason this system would be adopted by all the NASCAR series is to speed up the qualifying process.  That’s fine, but I didn’t realize there was a problem with how quickly qualifying happened.  This appears to me as something that isn’t necessarily broken, but NASCAR wants to fix it anyway.

Personally, my biggest objection with the multi-car qualifying idea is how fair this would be for everyone involved.  We’ve seen plenty of times in other forms of racing where one driver’s bonzai qualifying lap was ruined by another driver in the name of strategy.  With so much at stake, and the measures that teams go to in terms of finding an advantage, it isn’t crazy to think that this could happen in NASCAR.  Single car qualifying runs eliminate any possibility of tampering by another team.

On top of that, what if a driver blows an engine while qualifying, and the other driver on track drives into the oil left behind and wrecks their primary car?  A team could potentially have their weekend ruined before the race even starts.  How is that fair?  Under the system we have now, this would never happen, because NASCAR has the ability to clean the track in between qualifying runs.

With the current state of the sport I realize that NASCAR is trying to find ways to improve the racing and get more people to not only attend races, but also to watch on TV.  To me though, implementing multi-car qualifying will cause more problems then it actually fixes.

TheNASCARInsiders.com

Follow the Insiders on Twitter or be a fan on Facebook!

It’s official… NASCAR has released the schedules for the 2011 season, and seasons of speculation are finally over – both Kentucky and Kansas got their long-anticipated Cup dates.

I’ve never been the biggest advocated for giving Kentucky a Cup date and Kansas a second Cup date. They’re really just more of the same. That said, I’m glad NASCAR, ISC and SMI are bringing racing to fans who appreciate it.

Though I haven’t been the biggest proponent of adding dates to those two tracks, I (and TC) have been a proponent of taking a date away from California. The racing is never very good and for whatever reason the crowds just couldn’t be maintained. Some markets just cant support two dates.

I believe that’s the story in Atlanta. Though I like the track and the racing it produces, it too was having issues with attendance. From a business prospective it made more sense giving its second date to Kentucky – a place I think will be able to support the event.

Other welcome news was that SMI didn’t pull a date from New Hampshire – I thought for sure Bruton would use the police issue in Loudon to give Las Vegas a second date. The man in the gawdy sunglasses surprises.

Overall, while the 2011 schedule does bring us changes, there aren’t really a ton of surprises. As always, the internal politics of NASCAR, ISC and SMI keep the possibility of changes to a minimum. I’d certainly like to see a Chase that was more representative of the whole schedule, but I’m good with what is hopefully just the beginning of a truly improved schedule in NASCAR.

Some Thoughts on the Truck Series Schedule

With 24 scheduled events for the 2011 season, and another one TBA, the Truck Series  schedule is much improved over this year’s. Gone is the three week break between Daytona and Atlanta, and the two week break between Atlanta and Martinsville. Those successive breaks were a little excessive – not to mention they killed the momentum of the season.

There are a couple of two week breaks early on in 2011, and a month long break in the middle of the summer, but all in all they’ve done a much better job keeping the series flowing.

As far as filling that TBA date, why not have a triple-header at Richmond in September? There might be some logistical issues with the haulers, but who wouldn’t love to see the trucks make their RIR return?

I’m not sure what NASCAR is working on for that date, but my plea is that they keep them at a short track.

And finally a couple of disappointing spots. Pocono is back on the schedule. I think we all know my thoughts on that. And I don’t really understand the reasoning for moving the Phoenix date. It’s going to be weird for them to have an off-weekend before the season-finale at Homestead – and we’ve had such great late season showdowns.

What are your thoughts on Kentucky and Kansas and all three schedules for the 2011 season?

TheNASCARInsiders.com

Follow the Insiders on Twitter or be a fan on Facebook!

Say what you want about Bruton Smith, you can’t accuse the guy of not speaking his mind. And you can bet when there are eager reporters around him the gospel according to Bruton is about to be preached.

Though it might have gotten lost in the noise about Carl Edwards and Brad Keselowski, Smith took time this past weekend to give his take on the state of the sport, and the changes he would like to see made.

Among his comments, Smith lamented his investment in Motorsports Authentics calling it the “worst decision I have ever made in my business life.” He also said he believes he can get a Kentucky Cup race on the schedule for next season (see stories here, here and here).

Always interesting though were Smith’s suggestions on how to improve the sport. He suggested:

• NASCAR give Las Vegas a second Cup date to finish out the season and give Homestead California’s second date
• Consider changing the points system
• Make the fields smaller to eliminate start and park teams which he called a disgrace
• Alter the payout system, making wins worth more, to entice drivers to run more aggressively

I haven’t been the biggest advocate of moving the end of the year banquet to Las Vegas, but it clearly is a market that embraces the sport. Could they support two races a year? Probably. And why not finish the season in the place where you’re going to hold the banquet?

Smith said the health of the sport will be tied to the venues on NASCAR’s schedule. I think he makes an important point that the sport needs to stage events where the market is most likely to embrace the product. Unfortunately for Smith, NASCAR isn’t too likely to take dates away from the France family controlled ISC.

Another point Smith made was the need to remove the emphasis of points racing. Do you tune in every week to see your favorite driver run conservatively in order to maintain his points position? I’m guessing the answer is no. While I agree with him on that point I think altering the payout system penalizes those underfunded teams who do actually run full races (ex. Front Row Motorsports). I can’t say I have a better suggestion on how to get drivers to be more aggressive on track though.

On the topic of start and parks (though I could care less) I’m warming to the idea of making fields smaller. Maybe we need to go back to having the size of fields fluctuate depending on which track we’re at. It would redistribute the purses and give S+P’s less of an opportunity to participate.

I can’t say I agree with everything Smith said or suggested, but some of it made sense. For all his eccentricities I think he does a good job of understanding the wants and needs of fans. As one of the sport’s biggest stakeholders NASCAR ought to bring Bruton Smith to the table a little more often.