Yahoo Autos The RACER Mailbag, October 16
Welcome to the RACER Mailbag. Questions for any of RACER’s writers can be sent to mailbag@racer.com. We love hearing your comments and opinions, but letters that include a question are more likely to be published. Questions received after 3pm ET each Monday will be saved for the following week.
Q: Good news about Hailie Deegan joining Indy NXT for next season. She was pegged to be a future star of NASCAR and had backing of Ford. I know her stint with the Truck Series didn’t go well and it seemed support for her suddenly dropped. Glad she is challenging herself to start anew. With Jamie Chadwick and Hailie both in NXT, this gives that series more attention. Do you have any background information on how this steal from NASCAR happened? No experience in open wheel, so is this a push to get another woman in series or is there real potential in her adapting to this type of racing?
Dave
MARSHALL PRUETT: Jamie isn’t a guarantee to return to NXT. It wasn’t a steal as I see it; Hailie’s opportunities in stock car racing went away, and by summer, she and her backers were looking for a new arena to try. My favorite part is how committed she is to this switch to open-wheel racing. She spent four days at the HMD shop last week and is moving to Indianapolis. It’s also a multi-year deal, which is huge for her.
Her career to date reminds me a lot of what Austin Cindric had in his formative years — a lot of bouncing around from one series to another, trying a lot of different cars — and while it was all helpful in certain ways, it wasn’t until he locked in on NASCAR and did multiple seasons until he truly developed his skills.
Hailie’s been in that same cycle, so breaking out of it and dedicating the next few seasons to NXT is a great decision. Like Cindric, we know she’s talented, but won’t know how talented — not until she can focus on one series — until she’s able to fully invest herself in NXT. By the end of 2026, the full measure of her capabilities will be on display. Will that lead Deegan to IndyCar? Who knows, but I’m rooting for her.
Q: To Donald in Estero, FL from the last Mailbag — NASCAR seems to be the winner for swearing on live TV. At Atlanta 1992, Richard Petty’s in car video had him saying “Bring the f****g fire extinguisher” to the corner worker. Never heard it on any replays. In an after-race interview on being asked about winning Talladega for the fifth or sixth time, Dale Jr. said, ” That don’t mean s**t, Daddy won 10 times.” I believe he was fined for that. As for IndyCar, Arie Luyendyck had the international move over sign on full display from his on-car camera.
Walt, Dolan Springs
MP: Shut the front door! Whisky Tango Foxtrot! See you next Tuesday!
Q: What do you think are the chances of Renault coming to IndyCar? Seems odd that they are leaving F1 at the end of 2025, and that Honda demanded IndyCar get a third manufacturer. The timing seems perfect. Come on Roger work some magic, we do not want an-all Chevy IndyCar Series.
AE, Danville
MP: Renault’s performance brand Alpine has been searching for potential partners in the U.S. for an IMSA GTP program. As the brand is all about sports cars, and Alpine has a global open-wheel presence in F1, I’d think using its FIA WEC Hypercars in IMSA would be the most relevant route to go as they look to introduce Alpine to the U.S. in a few years. I’d put the chances of Renault or Alpine in IndyCar at zero percent.
It’s very possible that we’ll see Alpine racing in the U.S., but the closest it’s likely to get to IndyCar is the IMSA paddock at Long Beach. JEP/Motorsport Images
Q: While I was at Petit Le Mans down in the paddock, I noticed that when the cars were going from their garages to the track, all of the cars were driven all the way out except for the Ferrari 296 GT3. The Ferrari was either towed all the way to the track or a couple were towed to the gate right before the pits when the engine was then fired. Is there any particular reason for this, or just a coincidence?
Ian
MP: Great observation, Ian. I’m told by a 296 team that the cars have a really aggressive clutch release which makes low-speed maneuvering in the paddock around fans a real challenge, so teams just do the towing or pushing routine.
Q: I have a few questions about next year’s Indy 500. Do you know if Dreyer & Reinbold is entering two cars? And is Rahal entering a fourth car? If these all happen, then it looks like 34 entries. Do you know of any other possibilities?
Jim, Ontario, Canada.
MP: Yes on DRR. I’d expect most of the teams who have paying drivers or sponsorship seeking to do the 500 to enter extra cars. With operating costs for the season having shot up between 30-40 percent, running an extra car at the Speedway is a solid money maker.
We’ll have 27 full-time cars, plus known or expected extras from Andretti with Marco, Arrow McLaren with Kyle Larson, ECR for Carpenter, and MSR for Castroneves. Bill Abel plans to enter. I’d bet Ganassi will have an extra car, and likely with Coyne and RLL. Maybe a Foyt and Juncos as well. And then there’s the DRR cars. Lots of options to go well past 33.
Q: Any word on where Seabass will be racing next season? Any chance for him to join another IMSA team, or maybe an IndyCar ride?
Steve, Chicago
MP: He’ll be busy racing in Europe. Hope to have him for select IMSA rounds, though. Stay tuned.
Q: Did the proposed updated speedway wings die on the vine?
Billy
MP: Not dead, but not happening in 2025. Look to 2026 at the earliest.
Q: Aside from cost, what is the barrier to IndyCar having a new chassis? The DW12 is too old. Also, has there been any discussion on having additional manufacturers? Back in the day it was appealing to me to see different chassis manufacturer such as Lola, Reynard, Penske and March.
Steve
MP: Penske Entertainment keeps saying a new car will be here in 2027 or 2028, so there’s no apparent barriers at this time. There’s no discussions to be held; Dallara is IndyCar’s official chassis provider and the series isn’t searching for a second.
Q: I saw in your last Mailbag a few thoughts about the Vanderbilt Cup, but first a quick story.
Back in 2011 for the Centennial celebration, the IMS Museum converted the museum such that only Indy 500 winning cars were on display, and it was magical. However, the 1969 Brawner Hawk of Mario Andretti owned by the museum is truly a replica, to which the museum mentions the actual car is in the possession of The Smithsonian. I made a promise that, if possible, I would see the authentic 1969-winning car at some point in life.
Fast forward to 2022. The Smithsonian National Air & Space Museum opened a new exhibition, “Nation of Speed,” to which one of the jewels of the display is the 1969-winning car – the real car. One road trip to Washington, D.C., and there she was. To say I filled my camera up with wonderful images is an understatement.
To my surprise, literally feet from the car, and across from Richard Petty’s car from his 200th victory, was the original Vanderbilt Cup. In the words of Cousin Eddie, “she’s a beaut.” I had never seen the trophy first-hand before, but it definitely made me pause and admire the brilliance and craftsmanship of detail that went into it. So, it’s no longer in storage in Maryland, and the racing world is better for it.
Here’s to hoping both are on display for years to come, as the museum is worth the price of admission. Be that as it may, their website does have a virtual tour of the entire exhibit, in case there are those that cannot make the trip to Washington. Definitely worth the exploration.
David
MP: Great stuff, David. Thanks!
Q: Much of the strategy during an IndyCar race is driven by fuel mileage. As you stated in the last Mailbag, the pace at Milwaukee 1 and other tracks was slower than expected. Fans want to see these cars scream around the racetrack, not drive in eco mode.
Can you write about how the fuel allotment per race is determined and would IndyCar ever consider adding just a few more gallons to give the fans a show?
Dave Truty, Williamsville, NY
MP: The fuel tanks are fixed at 18.5 gallons, so there’s no quick solution to change that. But IndyCar could look to take some fuel capacity away and make more stops a reality, which might halt the desire to save fuel.
Q: Track limits should be enforced with electronic proximity sensors in each car and a sensor cable under the track edge. IndyCar had a version of this at Laguna Seca. The driver should have a readout or light in the cockpit and an audible signal in their ears that ramps up as they get closer to being off the track, so they have real-time feedback on their position and can immediately modify their approach and really learn what line and control to use. End of arguments.
Bruce
MP: Sure. Because racing needs more rules. And who doesn’t love more rules in sports to control creativity?
Q: What happens to all the marbles when the sweepers collect them?
Gordon Mann
MP: Unless there’s a vacuum going on, the marbles are brushed down the track or blown down the track.
All those marbles have to go somewhere. Sam Bagnall/Motorsport Images
Q: So 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports have filed a lawsuit alleging NASCAR and the France family “have stifled the competition, and control the sport in an unfair way.” And this lawsuit is a manifestation of their wish for more money to be allocated to charter teams – charters which effectively bar new entrants from having any hope of ever competing in NASCAR, and severely restricts the purse money available to non-charter teams should they decide to enter any races. Am I the only one seeing the irony here? The comedy writes itself, people, I just report the news.
I absolutely despise the notion of charters or franchises in motorsports. This disease infects F1, it infects NASCAR, and now it’s going to infect IndyCar. The entire essence of auto racing is that anyone who shows up at the track with a car that will pass tech should have an equal chance to qualify and race. Racing is a performance-based pursuit, no pun intended.
I’ve heard Jeff Gordon on a podcast bemoan that Hendrick Motorsports hasn’t made a profit in probably 10 years. I’ve heard Denny Hamlin on his podcast whining that 23XI can’t make a profit given the revenues allocated under the current charter agreement terms. Memo to Jeff and Denny – your teams could just reduce expenditures 10% across the board, and voila – you are now making a nice 10% profit margin. “But wait,” they will surely say, “we have to spend at this level to be competitive.” Exactly. And if charter terms were amended to allocate 20% more revenue to each charter team, spending will go up 20% across the board in pursuit of more speed and competitiveness. It’s the nature of the beast.
No matter how much the sanctioning bodies try to reduce cost, teams will find a way though simulator time, shock engineering, hiring more staff, spending more to develop and retain top talent, whatever, in order to gain a competitive edge. If you’re involved in racing, at any level, and you want to make a profit, the quickest and surest way to achieve that goal is to get out of racing.
Mike, Marietta, GA
MP: The spending wouldn’t go up 20 percent. Following that logic, every professional racing team also loses money because they spend everything they receive and more. The argument here, whether it’s accurate or not, is that the costs to compete — not to make up the numbers at the back of the field, but to run strong — exceed what’s being generated through sponsorship and charter revenue.
Maybe 15 percent of that extra 20 goes to competition and the other five percent is what takes the team from red to black. Yes, it’s hard to make a profit in racing, but racing would be nothing but an amateur sport if most teams were unable to run in the black.
Q: I want to get rid of the race at Indy before the 500. This suggestion will cost IndyCar some money: Have a Saturday night race at the oval in Miami the same weekend as the Formula 1 race. Make it free to all the fans who have F1 tickets. You don’t give up media to F1, and you give worldwide media and fans an up-close view of what we love.
Any word on what the IndyCar leadership thinks about NASCAR lawsuit? What does IndyCar need to do to prevent a similar thing from happening?
David Tucker
MP: Strange that after 10-plus years of existence, the Indy GP is still the least-loved event on the calendar, and delivers a tiny crowd, but Penske Entertainment continues to serve up this nothingburger of an event.
As if Roger and his acolytes would speak on the lawsuit in any meaningful way while Roger is an entrant who signed the NASCAR charter. IndyCar teams receive no profit sharing or TV revenue in their charter, so there’s not much to sue for right now.
Q: Can you explain or map out the long-term plan for PREMA? Could they eventually “earn” a charter? What about Leaders Circle money? I love that they are coming to IndyCar, but if it’s too difficult to maintain a program, it feels likely that the program will just shutter in a year or two.
What happens if they get a car or two to finish in the top 15 next year? Is PREMA looking at maybe buying out a group like Juncos Hollinger (or someone else) if/when they decide to leave? Clearly Penske wants more interest and support for IndyCar, so I can’t imagine he wants too many odds stacked up against PREMA.
Tom, Greenwood, SC
MP: Not in the first version of the charter, to my knowledge. There was a concept of charter “jokers” floated before it was finalized without them, where non-charter entries beating charter entries in the final standings could buy those charters at a pre-established sum, but that was shot down, I was told.
So, no, the only way PREMA gets charters is if they’re able to buy them. And they tried. I’ve heard Juncos quoted $40 million as the asking price.
Q: Will we ever see Simon Pagenaud again as active driver in IndyCar? Or, somehow associated with a team as driver coach, etc.?
Tom Fitzgerald, CPA, Las Vegas, NV
MP: If he fully recovers, yes, but we’re talking about an Indy 500 scenario, where he’s excellent, and nothing more. Not because he lacks the skills, but because he’s 40, and too much time has passed for him to be considered a top free agent coming off of a life-altering injury.
It’s a part of the sport I hate, but it’s just the reality of the situation. Simon was not having a great season when the brake failure happened and ended his year. The rough showings prior to the crash weren’t all his fault by any means, but that’s what potential employers remember — an unmemorable season, then a scary crash, then being unable to race for 1.5 seasons and counting — as they consider who to hire for the future. Just a cruel outcome for one of the series’ true good guys.
He did do some driver coaching this year, assisting Scott McLaughlin on the ovals.
Q: Hearing Robert Shwartzman will drive a PREMA car. Is there no longer a ban on Russian athletes?
Jean Dauwalter
MP: IndyCar sanctions itself, and I’ve yet to hear of IndyCar banning Russian drivers. Robert was born in Israel, and holds multiple passports.
Q: Could the charter system make it more difficult to field 33 entries in May? It seems that a non-charter one-off entry would be truly that – a one-off for Indy only, with little realistic hope of graduating to full time status based on that experience. It seems that a charter system increases the hurdle for graduation to full-time status so there is less incentive to start small (at Indy) and build toward something bigger.
Stated differently, why assemble a whole team and spend all that money to finish poorly at Indy with a one-off entry that has little hope of becoming anything more? It seems that only the 10 chartered teams could realistically field one-off cars in May because only they’d have the necessary infrastructure in place and could spread the cost of that one-off entry across multiple cars. Am I reading this wrong?
Tom, Lake Forest
MP: You’re reading it correctly, but I don’t think the 500 will suffer for adequate car counts. The charter isn’t welcoming to new Indy-only entrants, but if there’s a drop-off in those entrants, the full-time teams have more than enough cars to compensate with extra entries of their own.
Q: St. Petersburg is just about dead center in the hurricane path. Any word from Green Savoree? Can they recover in six months to make the St. Pete race happen? Or are they just monitoring the situation and will make a decision in a month or two once they have a clear idea of the extent of the damage?
John
MP: The promoter needs to see what the city decides to do before it would be able to make any proclamations, so no, we haven’t heard from them since they can only react to decisions by the city.
There’s no timeline for if or when we might see Pagenaud going flat into Turn 1 at Indy again, but his oval chops were an asset to McLaughlin this season. Geoffrey Miller/Motorsport Images
Q: Having just read Michael Andretti’s open letter to the fans, I’m not buying completely into his ‘time to step back’ answer.
1) The letter sounds like something from the PR department more than something from his heart.
2) All the time, effort and millions for an F1 bid only to step back now while the team moves forward? I just don’t see it, that’s not Michael.
3) Not seeing Michael at the track on a race by race basis amd only from time to time… my take is the entire Andretti family lives to race.
Unless there is something family- or health-related, it just does not add up and looks like a financial power play by his partner when the opportunity presented itself.
Any idea if Marco be running for Andretti Global at Indy in May, or for someone else like Dreyer & Reinbold, as that would be telling?
My “stranger things have happened” for 2025 is that Andretti Global changes its team name and Michael Andretti buys into or forms another racing team for IndyCar and the F1 bid moves on without him.
Dave, Gahanna, OH
MP: I’m sure there’s a healthy non-compete clause Michael would need to clear before a return would be possible. Regarding Marco, scroll down to the next question.
Q: How does, or will, the change in ownership/structure impact Marco Andretti’s Indy 500 effort? Will they still support a single-car entry for Marco?
Brian Davis
MP: I’ve heard nothing to suggest the team won’t run Marco in May.
Q: The renderings of the Arlington track are pretty sharp. Just hope in real life it works out better than the airport rental car return queue they threw up in the parking lot of the abandoned Astrodome in Houston.
Shawn, MD
MP: Same here.
Q: Are you still “not buying” Michael’s exit plan even after his letter? It just seems like a hostile takeover.
RGS, Geneseo, NY
MP: Correct, my opinion hasn’t changed. But at the same time, I’m not sure how much the truth matters here. The truth won’t change what’s happened, nor is Michael destitute. If this is the story he wants to tell, that’s his right.
Q: Is Hy-Vee looking to drop its sponsorship of the No. 45 a reflection of lack of results, or is this a case of Mr. Penske (whom I used to have great admiration for!) poaching the sponsorship?
Russell Zipoff
MP: According to Hy-Vee, it has ceased all car sponsorships in IndyCar, and any event sponsorships outside of Iowa. Assuming this doesn’t change, we can breathe a sigh of relief. Had Hy-Vee left RLL and showed up on a car affiliated with Team Penske, there would have been an uprising in the paddock.
As for the reasoning, we didn’t get that answer, but I believe the deal that ran through 2024 was done with its former CEO, who was gone from the company when it was time for an extension to be explored. Also, even if the new CEO wasn’t a fan, the case to continue would have been stronger if the No. 45 was winning races and a semi-regular podium finisher.
Q: On the whole, I like the look of the new Arlington circuit but am concerned that Turns 1 and 2 are going to be a problem due to the pit exit location. It looks pretty narrow. What do you think?
Doug Mayer
MP: Shouldn’t be an issue if drivers exiting the pits are prohibited from diving straight to the apex at Turn 2. I’m more concerned about the funneling into Turn 1 on the start. I’d guess IndyCar will do like they do in Portland and throw the green super early so the field spreads out before they get to the first corner.
Q: It was like my voice has been heard by IndyCar. If you look at the current street circuits, they all seem to be about a 1.6 or 1.7 miles long, be it St. Petersburg, Toronto or Detroit, with the exception being Long Meach at 1.9 miles. You need a track minimum length to be about two miles for any kind of meaningful racing to happen, especially when there are big beasts like IndyCar racing around the circuit.
I hope this is the beginning of a trend where proper long, wide-open street tracks will become a norm rather than regressing to the old short, narrow racetracks. I hope when IndyCar goes back to Nashville, they build in the track around the stadium right now so a track like Arlington can be achieved. And I hope to see St. Petersburg, Detroit and Toronto stretch out by a bit. I think in the long run this Arlington racetrack will be the best of IndyCar street tracks
Shyam Cherupalla
MP: I wouldn’t hold out too much hope on going back to downtown Nashville. It’s not impossible, but if the Nashville Speedway solution continues to be a success, the argument to put on a big and intensive production in the middle of a city becomes harder to make.
Some (though apparently not Scott Borchetta) might have found the whole drummer-picks-up-a-guitar thing a bit disconcerting at Nashville. But apart from that, the event made a strong case for the Speedway becoming its permanent home. Michael Levitt/Motorsport Images
Q: In light of the recent Grand Prix of Arlington announcement, I’ll say a couple of nice things. The layout looks like it will lend itself to a good street race, and if this race ends taking the slot currently occupied by the Thermal Club, that’s a trade I will gladly take.
What is rubbing me the wrong way is the sentiment and messaging of “IndyCar is finally in Dallas!” when there has been a race in the area for 30 years. The rollout for the Grand Prix has been impressive but I can’t help but feel that if the race at Texas Motor Speedway had half of the same energy being put into it, then maybe it survives. It’s no secret the past couple of years was brutal in the terms of attendance, but the races in the mid 2010s had OK crowds, so what’s the smoking gun for the race’s demise? No more Eddie? Changes in the race date and track reconfiguration? SMI and IndyCar not playing nice with each other?
Mitch, Michigan
MP: As I was told, IndyCar was willing to accept all kinds of imperfect options to race at TMS this year, but the track said no each time. With the Olympics compressing the calendar, the series was willing to go early, late, and right after a NASCAR visit, which would have come with a smaller crowd after folks just spent a bunch to see a Cup race the previous weekend, and all options were declined.
Q: In my opinion Andretti stepping back from his company has to do with Maffei telling the Andrettis, ‘You will never get in into F1 on my watch.’ Maffei was upset about the Andrettis getting Congress involved. This way Towriss can continue the F1 plan. Right now, F1 is a good business to be in. What’s your opinion? Oh, by the way Toyota wants a piece of the publicity so much so that they’re basically sponsoring a Ferrari-engined team!
Jack. Ft. Pierce, FL
MP: Pretty much what I wrote two weeks ago in the Mailbag, Jack. All my sources continue to say this is a move to appease Cadillac/Liberty Media.
Q: I’m so disappointed with the Andretti F1 rejection. I often wondered if Penske/Cadillac applied for entry into Formula 1 with a more professional/conservative attitude if the result would have been different. Do you have an opinion on that?
Also, do you feel Cadillac would continue without Andretti, and if so, how do you see that working? As an engine only supplier? As a factory team? Partner with an existing team?
Mark, Buffalo, NY
CHRIS MEDLAND: No, I don’t think the result would have been different, although a different approach might have created fewer headlines. F1 was very strong on not wanting to expand the grid in the short term, regardless of the team that was showing an interest. It wanted to see a strengthening of what already exists, such as what we’re seeing now with Audi taking over Sauber, Ford getting involved with Red Bull, Honda with Aston Martin and now to a lesser extent Toyota with Haas.
But it also needs remembering that it’s not a total rejection. F1 said it was open to something in 2028 if Cadillac committed to being a power unit supplier as it stated its intention was, and I am told that conversations are ongoing on that front and positive. Cadillac has always maintained that it would only enter with Andretti and I believe that to be the case. The only way I could see it working if it changed its mind would be to partner with an existing team.
Q: What does the Haas/Toyota deal mean for the future of F1? Could you see other teams doing a similar deal with other car makers? Have you heard any kind of reaction for the other F1 teams?
David Tucker
CM: Toyota is a unique case. It has an amazing motorsport facility in Cologne from its old F1 constructor spell that ended in 2009, and its WEC and rally projects among other things. There aren’t really any other car makers that have similar facilities in Europe that aren’t already involved in F1. So I don’t think it changes anything for the future of the sport, other than it might entice Toyota to increase its involvement further down the line if the partnership goes well and it sees value in doing so. It brings Toyota closer, but different manufacturers are involved in so many different ways I wouldn’t say it stands out in any particularly way as a model.
I haven’t heard of any reaction from other teams directly to this, but as a wider discussion point I believe there were some who were trying to push back on Testing of Previous Car (TPC) programs and limit their scope a little, so it took a while for Haas to understand how that was going to look going forward while in talks with Toyota – which will help it run a TPC program.
Toyota never won in F1, although Mailbag icon Jarno Trulli gave the team a P2 in its third-last race at Suzuka in 2009. Motorsport Images
Q: I get the F1 franchise system is to increase the value for all teams. It probably does initially. But has anyone discussed what happens when the same teams are at the bottom consistently? I am thinking of Sauber, RB, Williams and Haas. How do you attract talent and sponsorship to get out? Also, would Mercedes put up with not winning the championship for extended periods of time? Does the value hold?
Steve
CM: I’d say you’re seeing that become far less of a thing though, Steve. Nobody has finished bottom for two consecutive seasons since Williams in 2019 and 2020, and that’s a team that is clearly improving along with the majority of the others. Sauber stands out as poor this year but is a big team that is getting Audi backing, so we’re seeing the standard raised everywhere and the potential for one team that finishes 10th one year to be as high as sixth the next.
More than that, though, through F1 tightening the technical regulations, we’re seeing a smaller overall field spread and teams able to make huge strides in shorter periods of time. Look at McLaren – it was genuinely one of the bottom teams at the start of 2023, and now leads the championship. There’s been a real spread of talent and big backing across all teams that they all have potential to produce competitive results.
One area where F1 has really grown, though, is in the understanding of the challenge by the wider world, how important points can be in a season, and how long it can take to become a winning team. So I believe sponsors of those teams want to be part of those journeys, and the sport is so big globally it provides a huge platform regardless of where the team is finishing in the standings.
I think the same is true of Mercedes. The brand received a huge boost from being involved in F1. Yes, winning championships certainly helped, but simply being competitive and now having that history also provides value. Mercedes itself owns 33% of the team (equal alongside Toto Wolff and INEOS) so it’s not bankrolling the entire setup and therefore still gets a very good marketing return just by being involved.
To reference Mark’s earlier question about Andretti and Cadillac, the reason teams and manufacturers want to be involved is because F1 is such an enormous marketing platform that reaches globally in a way no other racing series does.
THE FINAL WORD
From Robin Miller’s Mailbag, October 16, 2013
Q: The first race I ever saw was the 1982 Indianapolis 500. To date, I still believe that is the greatest 500 that’s been run in the last 35 years. I was 13 then and what kept me coming back were the cars. The innovation and new styles every year were exciting. I know you have indicated that you believe that the DW12 has produced the most exciting racing in the last 40-plus years but we have to look at the history of the sport. The legends became legends because of their ability to master cars on the edge of technology.
I would recommend going back and looking at some of Paul Page’s intros to the 500; his words were 100 percent correct. Now, where is the innovation? Where is the technology? I also get that it’s about money but I will suggest that good racing alone will not bring back the fans. Yes, we need stars and new legends but I will suggest that the cars and the technology will create the stars. Think about it: there were more fans in the ’80s and ’90s when very few races were up for contention at the end. Now most are and we are in the doldrums.
If the sport gets re-elevated to its elite status, the money will come. Look at Larry Ellison and the freakish amount he spent on the America’s Cup. The money will come once the fans come back, and so far I see nothing different that we are doing today than IndyCar was doing five to 10 years ago. I think IndyCar is trying to regulate cost too much. Without rehashing the obvious reasons that I mentioned above, why doesn’t IndyCar simply put out basic formula rules and let the owners buy or build the best car they can? The formula worked before and it can work again. I think its IndyCar’s only hope.
Michael, Atlanta, GA
ROBIN MILLER: It’s true that many of us want more powerful cars that look different and push technology. But are there enough of those people out there to really make a difference in attendance or TV ratings? And I think IndyCar needs some assurance from Ford or Dodge or Audi that they want to come play with a clean sheet of paper. Until then, why mess with the only thing you’ve got right now – good competition? Maybe just open up the rules for the Indy 500 but, again, will that get you teams from sports cars, NASCAR or F1?
