How do other series compare against NASCAR's TV audience?

The Monster Energy NASCAR Cup Series is the leading motorsports series in the American television and the only series averaging over two million viewers. The only non-NASCAR race in the same territory of viewership is the Indianapolis 500, attracting an audience above the average of the NASCAR Cup Series but still less the half of that of NASCAR's flagship race, the Daytona 500.

NASCAR Cup Series and Indy 500 viewership. Click to enlarge.

I have excluded the Daytona 500 from Fox's Cup Series average because it has almost twice the audience of the second-most-viewed Cup race. Still, Fox's NASCAR coverage has more viewers than NBC's, both over-the-air and on cable.

Fox carries momentum from Daytona during the early season and a declining viewership during the season is a trend in NASCAR's TV ratings. Half of the NBC portion of the NASCAR season takes place once the football season has started, hurting NBC's ratings. Although the playoffs were introduced to create excitement into the late season clashing with football, the playoff races' ratings are still down on the summer races on NBC and NBCSN.

The overall trend was NASCAR's TV ratings going down. The average audience for the over-the-air telecasts on Fox was down 7 percent (including Daytona) and on NBC down 6 percent on 2016. On cable, the average audience was down 11 percent on both FS1 and NBCSN.

Comparable averages, different characteristics for INDYCAR, F1, NHRA audience

Not only the Monster Energy Cup Series is the most-viewed motorsports series in American television but also the Xfinity Series gets more viewers than any non-NASCAR series. I have split the Camping World Truck Series on FS1 into spring and fall parts to make it comparable with the other two NASCAR series where the season is split between Fox in the spring and NBC in the fall. The spring and fall averages of the Truck Series showcase the momentum NASCAR has after the Daytona Speedweeks and the struggle during the football season.

Xfinity, Trucks, INDYCAR, F1, and NHRA OTA audience.

Xfinity, Trucks, INDYCAR, F1, and NHRA cable audience.

The two open-wheel categories, INDYCAR and Formula One, are natural rivals, although they also complement each other and have a somewhat overlapping fanbase.

On free-to-air channels, the Verizon IndyCar Series races outside the 500 were usually in the same territory with F1 in TV ratings. However, 2017 was a bad year for INDYCAR on ABC with a 16-percent decline in the audience (excluding the Indy 500 and its qualifications). F1 on NBC has been split into two in the diagram above because the NFL usually hurts the fall races' audience. Still, the U.S. Grand Prix had 1.0 million viewers, up 45 percent from 2016, while the Mexican GP the following week had 825 thousand viewers, only marginally above the 2016 audience.

On cable, INDYCAR attracts slightly more viewers than F1. There are certain different characteristics in the viewership of those two series. While F1 consistently draws an audience between 500 and 600 thousand viewers for almost all the races in the European time zones, INDYCAR's audience varies more from race to race.

INDYCAR's viewership peaks between June and the end of August. That's a period when three major leagues, NFL, NBA, and NHL, are having the offseason. INDYCAR's higher peak of audience may be because it's more familiar of a series for the American audience plus afternoon races attract more casual viewers than F1 races in early Sunday morning.

On the other hand, apart from some Asian races in the middle of the night, F1 hardly ever gets as low TV ratings as INDYCAR sometimes gets. Maybe F1 has a more dedicated fanbase in the USA than INDYCAR's. Also, F1 races early in the morning don't usually clash with other major sports events.

I have split NHRA on FS1 into spring and fall averages because of the big difference in viewership. Until June, most NHRA races are shown tape-delayed after the NASCAR Cup race. The NASCAR lead-in allowed NHRA to attract the biggest cable audience for a non-NASCAR series and also above the NASCAR Trucks' audience. On the other hand, the viewership drops to under half of the early season once NHRA on FS1 goes opposite to NASCAR on NBC's channels and the NFL starts in September.

NHRA was the only series showing growth both over-the-air and on cable in 2017, although it was minimal. On Fox, NHRA's OTA audience was comparable to that of INDYCAR's.

Formula One has the youngest audience

Unsurprisingly the Monster Energy NASCAR Cup Series is the leading motorsports series also in the 18-49 age group, and the Daytona 500 is clearly the most-viewed race also in that age group. However, the decline the 18-49 audience is even more rapid than in the total audience. The average 18-49 audience for the over-the-air telecasts on Fox was down 12 percent (including Daytona) and on NBC down 18 percent on 2016. On cable, the the decline was even more drastic with the average 18-49 audience down 18 percent on FS1 and 24 percent on NBCSN.

NASCAR Cup Series and Indy 500 viewership in the 18-49 age group.

If the Indy 500 attracted just under half of the total audience of the Daytona 500, the gap is even bigger in the 18-49 age group where Indy attracts only one third of Daytona's 18-49 audience. The age structure of the NASCAR Cup Series' fanbase looks slightly better than INDYCAR's: the 18-49 age group makes up 25 percent of the Cup Series' total audience during the season, for INDYCAR it's 22 percent. And while the Daytona 500 attracts young people more than other races with the 18-49 audience making up 30 percent of the total audience, for the Indy 500 it's only 22 percent. INDYCAR is struggling to attract younger generations as the viewership also for other races shows.

Xfinity, Trucks, INDYCAR, F1, and NHRA OTA audience in the 18-49 group.

Xfinity, Trucks, INDYCAR, F1, and NHRA cable audience in the 18-49 group.

If INDYCAR's total audience outside the 500 has been comparable to F1's audience, that's not the case in the 18-49 age group. INDYCAR lost 25 percent of its 18-49 audience on ABC in 2017, making it the least-viewed series on OTA channels in that age group. Despite the overall growth of the audience on NBCSN, INDYCAR also lost cable audience in the 18-49 group.

F1 has a positive outlook in America. It may be a niche sport in the USA but it has a young audience with the 18-49 age group making up 31 percent of the total audience. The Monaco and Canadian Grands Prix already averaged above the NASCAR Xfinity Series on OTA channels in 18-49 audience and F1 on NBCSN was in the territory of the Truck Series' viewership.

NHRA's viewership in the 18-49 age group drops more drastically when it loses the NASCAR lead-in on FS1. The 18-49 group makes up 24 percent of the total audience of the spring races on FS1 whereas they make up only 20 percent in the fall. That implies the younger audience are more of casual viewers that stay on the channel after the NASCAR race.

While a few series showed increased 18-49 viewership on the OTA networks, all series' cable viewership decreased in the 18-49 group. Cord cutting may be behind the decreased 18-49 cable viewership. Young adults don't want to pay for channels they don't have time to watch because of family and work reasons. If anything, they opt for streaming services they can watch on mobile devices wherever they are, and whenever they want, thanks to video-on-demand.

INDYCAR and F1 battling for the leading open-wheel series' status

NASCAR has been America's leading motorsport in the 00s and 10s, however it's losing fans as its star drivers are retiring and the racing is not as good as it used to be. And while the NASCAR management is trying to make the sport more exciting, the rule changes are dividing the fanbase and driving some fans away. Still, I don't expect any series to challenge NASCAR's leading position in America any time soon, so big is NASCAR's fanbase.

F1 has a positive outlook in America. While it's been losing viewership worldwide this decade, it's been growing in the USA and it has the youngest fanbase of major motorsports in the USA. Younger generations are more open towards global, traditionally non-American sports like soccer or Formula One, and the Internet allows them to follow the news even if the sport is not mainstream in the USA.

F1 will not be a direct rival for NASCAR, they are two totally different categories. NASCAR is as American as it gets, F1 is global. The two categories have a different target audience. And even though the American owners of F1 want to expand F1's footprint in the USA and add races there, most of the races will still take place in Europe or Asia in difficult time zones for the American audience.

F1 will face a challenge in the USA next year as it moves from NBC to ESPN. On NBC F1 was cross-promoted with the group's INDYCAR and NASCAR coverage, for ESPN the only motorsports programming is the five INDYCAR races on ABC. INDYCAR's decreasing viewership on ABC as opposed to the solid ratings on NBCSN does not look too promising F1 on ESPN.

INDYCAR has been trying to get back the fans it lost during its split years, and it has succeeded in growing its cable audience during the last few years. Still, it's been more about growing its core audience. The OTA audience, especially for the 500, has been down, implying INDYCAR struggles to attract casual viewers.

INDYCAR has an old fanbase, partly because the split years cost it younger generations. Attracting young fans is the most important thing for INDYCAR's future. If the current 18-49 viewership translates into the future overall viewership, INDYCAR will no longer be the leading alternative to NASCAR but a second-tier open-wheel series to F1 even in the American media. INDYCAR needs to outperform its rivals in social media and other media that young people consume.

There is no easy way to improve TV ratings, apart from a better TV deal and avoiding bad time slots. INDYCAR already has an on-track product second to none. Although I'm writing about the TV ratings, I think it's the live race experience that can drive up INDYCAR's popularity. INDYCAR needs more events like Long Beach, Road America, Gateway, and of course the 500; well-attended events that are more than races and can become known nationwide. INDYCAR currently lacks a bit of the feel of a major series; well-attended events would give it the impression of something big.

It would be especially great for INDYCAR if there were more oval races. Ovals offer a product that could appeal also to NASCAR fans and offer the kind of thrill that even F1, the pinnacle of motorsports, lacks.

I think INDYCAR with its US-centered schedule has more potential than F1 to become truly mainstream in the States. Then again, if the younger generations choose F1 over INDYCAR and NASCAR remains relatively popular, then there may be no space for INDYCAR as a high-profile series outside the 500.

Numbers via Awful Announcing, Showbuzz Daily, and Sports Media Watch.

The numbers don't include streaming services, thus may differ from the numbers announced by the broadcasters. Rain-delayed races excluded from averages if delayed until Monday. Tape delays included besides live telecasts for races shown live on a secondary channel (e.g. CNBC) and F1 races shown live before 8am.

Instead of Mexico, INDYCAR should look at Japan

INDYCAR announced last week it won't add a race in Mexico City in the 2018 Verizon IndyCar Series schedule. It was disappointing news after all the positive talk about the chances of a 2018 Mexico race, though the sanctioning body is working to make the race happen in 2019.

Adrián Fernández, the Mexican Indy car star of the 90s and 00s, warned earlier in the fall that the attendance at Mexico City will be a disappointment if there are no full-time Mexican drivers in INDYCAR. Esteban Gutiérrez replaced Sébastien Bourdais in seven races in 2017 while the Frenchman was recovering from his Indy 500 qualifying accident, though the Mexican is still without a contract for 2018. The Mexico race not happening may imply Gutiérrez won't be in INDYCAR in 2018.

Maybe Mexico is not the market INDYCAR should be looking at, at least at the moment. Maybe INDYCAR needs a Mexican star before going there.

INDYCAR's big challenge is to get out of the shadow of NASCAR in the USA and Formula One elsewhere. At least in the States INDYCAR can get a good crowd at non-NASCAR venues like Road America, Gateway, or Long Beach. INDYCAR's recognition is minimal abroad and it would need local stars to make international races successful.

I'm not sure Gutiérrez is the driver who can make INDYCAR big in Mexico. He's the 2010 GP3 Series champion but has not achieved a lot in his career since then. Even if Gutiérrez made a career in INDYCAR, he may not be the new Fernández who won a total of 11 races in CART and IRL combined.

F1 driver Sergio Pérez is Mexico's racing star and the Mexican Grand Prix draws a great crowd. It would be hard for INDYCAR to replicate that without a Mexican star driver. If INDYCAR wants a great event, I'm not sure Mexico City will be it. On the other hand, Mexico would be a well-needed race in February or March when it's still too cold in most of the USA.

The Puebla oval was mentioned earlier in the rumors about a Mexican race. I think it could have more potential for INDYCAR than Mexico City has. INDYCAR would not be in the shadow of F1 at Puebla and the Verizon IndyCar Series schedule needs more ovals. The problem with the 1.25-mile oval is that the SAFER Barrier should be installed before INDYCAR could race there.

Japan, Brazil, Australia have more potential

If INDYCAR lacks a Mexican star, it's got a foreign star in the Japanese Takuma Sato. The Indy 500 winner was the first to take the Borg-Warner Trophy abroad and the grandstands were packed during his demonstration run at the Motegi oval during Honda's fan festival.

Twin Ring Motegi hosted 14 American open-wheel races between 1998 and 2011 with the last one being on the road course because of earthquake damage to the oval. While the oval has still not been fixed to suit for racing, the road course could host an INDYCAR race. The legendary Suzuka Circuit could be another option, also being owned by Honda.

With a Japanese star driver and a Japanese manufacturer, there is no better opportunity for INDYCAR to break through in Japan than there is now. Sato is 40 now and not getting any younger, though he should have some five good years left in the sport. And once Sato retires, maybe Honda will promote some Japanese talent to replace him.

The calendar slot would be the problem with a Japanese race. INDYCAR wants its overseas races in February or March before staying in North America from March for the rest of the season. However, that must not prevent a potential race in Japan. Most of the previous Motegi races took place in April so a race in Japan could bridge the gap between St. Petersburg and Long Beach.

Brazil is another foreign country that has shown fan interest in INDYCAR. Hélio Castroneves and Tony Kanaan have been the Brazilian heros in American open-wheel racing during the past two decades. While Castroneves has now left full-time INDYCAR racing for IMSA and also Kanaan is in the late stages of his career, the 2018 rookie Matheus Leist has already shown lots of promise in junior open-wheel series and may become Brazil's next INDYCAR star.

An INDYCAR race in Brazil could have some potential, though it would need the right promoter. Most lately, INDYCAR raced in São Paulo from 2010 to 2013 and was set to return to Brazil in Brasília in 2015 before local officials canceled the race. A race in Brazil could be the kind of an early-season race INDYCAR wants, though a reliable promoter and Brazilian representation in the Verizon IndyCar Series would be needed.

Australia has the longest overseas traditions of American open-wheel racing as Surfers Paradise hosted races annually for 18 years between 1991 and 2008. A tram line has made the old CART layout unsuitable for racing, though Virgin Australia Supercars is still racing there on a shortened layout. The shortened layout might not necessarily be too short for INDYCAR, however Supercars have taken over the race date and it's hard to see a street course with another racing event.

Australia might or might not be a good place for INDYCAR. Besides the tradition of hosting American open-wheel racing, Australia has a star driver in INDYCAR in the 2014 series champion Will Power. On the other hand, next year it will be a decade since Indy cars' last visit to Surfers. Australia has a strong local championship in Supercars and Australia's biggest racing star is the F1 driver Daniel Ricciardo. INDYCAR might have some potential in Australia but also face strong competition there.

Europe is F1 and MotoGP continent

Europe has lots of classic racing tracks and many people would like to see INDYCAR at some of the venues F1 has left. However, I'm skeptical about INDYCAR's prospects in Europe.

The European motorsports market is dominated by F1, MotoGP, and some local big events. INDYCAR doesn't get much exposure in the European media and I wouldn't expect a big crowd for an INDYCAR race in Europe.

Europe is no different from the rest of the world; INDYCAR would need a national hero in some European country to become big there. But it's so hard for an INDYCAR driver to become a national hero in Europe. Simon Pagenaud is the 2016 series champion but we couldn't see him getting the same reception in France that Indy 500 winner Sato got in Japan.

In Europe, it's hard for drivers to become stars in their countries unless they have success in F1. As long as INDYCAR doesn't get full-time drivers of the caliber of Nigel Mansell, it will not break through in Europe. Fernando Alonso's Indy 500 ambitions aren't enough to make the full series noted in the European media.

It would be hard to accommodate European races into the Verizon IndyCar Series schedule because most European venues don't come into question before April. INDYCAR needs to dedicate the summer for North American races instead of a time-consuming overseas trip, unless the country has lots of potential like Japan seemingly has.

INDYCAR doesn't need international races for the sake of being international. INDYCAR needs good race events. At the moment I can see more potential in the USA and Canada than overseas. The return to Road America and Gateway showed INDYCAR can attract a good crowd at the right venues. Overseas it's more difficult because of the minimal exposure INDYCAR gets there. Japan, Brazil, and Australia are very much the only overseas countries I'd look at.

Formula E is changing motorsports landscape

The FIA Formula E Championship is starting its fourth season. Although the series doesn't enjoy huge mainstream exposure yet, it has attracted major manufacturers and some of the best drivers outside Formula One.

Formula E has already changed the motorsports landscape. Audi and Porsche ended their LMP1 programs in favor of a Formula E program, leaving Toyota as the only OEM brand in the FIA WEC's top class. Mercedes will leave the DTM after the 2018 season to join Formula E while the other DTM manufacturers Audi and BMW will be featured in both series.

Formula E may not be the series with the biggest exposure but it appears as the most relevant series for the manufacturers. Electric vehicles are growing their market share and Formula E offers a chance to develop the technology. Manufacturer involvement also helps Formula E to attract some of the best drivers outside F1.

Being such a new series means Formula E is still relatively inexpensive for manufacturers. The costs will surely go up with new manufacturers joining the series. It is almost inevitable that at some point some manufacturer doesn't see enough return on their investment and will leave the series. But because of the development of the EV technology, I believe Formula E will remain a highly relevant series for manufacturers, regardless of how much exposure it gets.

Can Formula E challenge Formula One?

While Formula E has already major manufacturers like Audi, Citroën, Jaguar, and Renault, and will be joined by BMW, Mercedes, and Porsche, Formula One is at a historical low with only four engine manufacturers. While F1 uses hybrid technology to make it more relevant for the manufacturers' R&D, the cost of competing in F1 is very high and the risk of a failure is big as shown by Honda.

Maybe Formula E has already won the technological war. Electric vehicles are a major part of the future of mobility and thus a full-electric series is highly relevant for manufacturers. Hybrid vehicles may just be for the transition phase from internal combustion engine to electric motors, and the rapid development of EV technology may make hybrids obsolete.

Still, Formula E is hardly a true alternative for Formula One. The difference in the performance of the cars is very big as the video below shows. Formula E may be attractive on twisty street courses but can't offer the thrill of speed Formula One offers at tracks like Spa or Suzuka.

While Formula E is not really a rival for Formula One in fan interest, it is already in manufacturer interest. Given that Formula E offers manufacturers more relevant R&D opportunities, maybe Formula One should rely more on its marketing power instead of R&D opportunities.

Formula One has been losing viewers. The hybrid era hasn't been attractive to fans because of the big disparity of the grid. Maybe F1 should abandon the hybrid technology in favor of traditional internal combustion engines to attract more manufacturers and have a closer parity of the grid.

Abandoning the hybrid technology would make F1 less relevant for the manufacturers' R&D. However, the low number of manufacturers currently in F1 implies the current regulations haven't been particularly relevant anyway. Abandoning the hybrid technology would bring down the costs, while closer parity could help to increase the viewership, making an F1 project a better marketing investment. To continue spreading the green message, F1 could switch to biofuels, like the E85 fuel blend used in INDYCAR.

Formula E's strength in attracting manufacturers is the relevant EV technology, Formula One's strength is the marketing opportunities its huge audience provides. F1 may already have lost the technological war so it should concentrate on providing the best on-track product for the fans.

Formula E ended WEC's growth

The LMP1 class of the FIA WEC appeared attractive to manufacturers just a few years ago. It allowed manufacturers to develop and promote hybrid technology. However, once the full-electric Formula E emerged with lower costs, Audi and Porsche left LMP1 for Formula E and the WEC is struggling to get a new OEM joining Toyota and privateer teams in the top class.

Just like I think F1 would do better without hybrid technology, I also think the same about the WEC. While Toyota is the only OEM brand in the WEC's top class, IMSA has four manufacturers in its top class where hybrid technology is not required or even allowed.

It was only a few years ago that the WEC was seen as a potential challenger for F1 in most optimistic predictions, however I'm less optimistic about its future prospects than Formula E's. Endurance racing just isn't for masses. The 24 Hours of Le Mans is the only race that gets mainstream attention, and even the shorter six-hour races are too long for casual viewers. Besides, three-driver crews put less emphasis on individuals whom casual fans could root for.

The WEC needs to be run as a niche sport. Even if it was highly relevant for R&D, it doesn't give such a big exposure F1 gives. The costs of competing in the WEC should be in line with the exposure. Rather than being an expensive class for factory teams, LMP1 should be affordable for privateer and customer teams with some manufacturer involvement.

Formula E is no direct rival for INDYCAR

Formula E is challenging INDYCAR for the status of the second-most important open-wheel series in the world. While Formula E has nothing as prestigious as the Indy 500, Formula E has more manufacturer involvement.

Formula E attracts some of the best drivers outside Formula One because factory teams can afford hiring best drivers available without the need to bring additional sponsorship. In INDYCAR there is only a limited number of fully-funded cars, meaning additional sponsorship is often needed to get a seat. Besides, oval racing is a turn-off for some drivers who'd otherwise have the talent to make it in INDYCAR.

Still, Formula E is not really a direct rival for INDYCAR. INDYCAR is one of North America's leading motorsports, Formula E is a global series but in no place it is as big as INDYCAR is in North America. INDYCAR may be a niche sport in the USA but Formula E's exposure in the American media is just marginal compared to INDYCAR.

Whether Formula E has more worldwide viewers or not is not relevant for INDYCAR. INDYCAR needs growth primarily in North America; overseas are not relevant for a series with mostly American sponsors. It's better for INDYCAR to be local and big than global and small. Increased audience will lead to an increase in sponsorship money, making it easier for INDYCAR teams to attract drivers from other series. Household names from F1 will make it easier for INDYCAR to get attention overseas but INDYCAR needs to grow in North America first.

In terms of manufacturer interest, the same applies here. If INDYCAR can increase its audience, it will be more attractive for manufacturers. Going away from the internal combustion engine isn't really an option for INDYCAR; a hybrid system would only be a ballast at ovals where you don't usually brake. Besides, it will take a long time before a full-electric race car could complete 500 miles in under three hours. INDYCAR needs to offer the manufacturers a cost-effective platform to promote their brands.

While Formula E is one of the most attractive series for drivers outside Formula One, also INDYCAR attracts drivers. When Alexander Rossi was left without a seat in F1, he moved to INDYCAR. Robert Wickens will make his INDYCAR debut in 2018 after six seasons at Mercedes in the DTM, and the Le Mans winner Brendon Hartley was already under contract with Ganassi before Toro Rosso bought him out for the 2018 F1 season. And of course Fernando Alonso raced in the 500 this year. If INDYCAR can grow its audience and attract more sponsors, teams will have more money to attract drivers.

What to expect from Formula E's future?

Formula E is the top destination for drivers outside Formula One, just like CART was in the 90s, DTM in the 00s, and the WEC in the early 2010s. However, unlike the WEC which went from boom to bust in a span of few years, I expect Formula E to remain attractive for manufacturers for years to come because EV technology is most relevant for their R&D.

Formula E has a short race format of less than one hour. That should make the series easy for casual viewers to watch. The winter schedule might have more potential to fill the void of racing during other series' offseason; over half of the Formula E season takes place after the Formula One season has started.

I don't really expect Formula E to become a true alternative for Formula One anytime soon because of the big performance gap. That being said, it would be interesting to see what would happen if Formula E truly started challenging Formula One for popularity. That kind of competition might be as destructive as the CART-IRL split of American open-wheel racing.

If Formula E ever gets close to Formula One cars' performance, it would probably make the most sense to merge the series to prevent any destructive competition. Electric vehicles will be a big part of the future of mobility and manufacturer interest will probably eventually dictate F1 to switch to full-electric cars. Formula E could provide a ready concept for Formula One to switch to full-electric cars. But that's still years, maybe decades away.

On the other hand, if more electric series emerge, manufacturers may be divided between different series. There are already some single-make electric GT series set to debut, and I expect to see more electric GT and touring cars in the future. While multiple electric series may divide manufacturers, it's always good to have alternatives.

ACO, IMSA need a shared vision of sportscar racing's future

The LMP1 class is set for an overhaul of its technical regulations for 2020 and beyond. A possible future direction is aligned LMP1 and DPi regulations, creating a common top class for the FIA World Endurance Championship and the IMSA WeatherTech SportsCar Championship.

While a common top class would be desirable, the differences in the ideologies of the WEC and IMSA may be problematic. LMP1 is more of a technology-driven class whereas the DPi class is aimed to be cost-effective. Some compromises would be needed to create a single class.

In a way, the WEC and IMSA are like Formula One and INDYCAR. In both cases, there are a FIA World Championship and its American counterpart. While it's good to have alternatives in open-wheel racing that complement each other, sportscar racing is a smaller sport and would do better without unnecessary division.

If anything, the LMP1-DPi division is like the CART-IRL split. Both are examples two different visions of the same sport. Just like the American open-wheel sport's recovery after the unification has shown, it would be better also for sportscar racing if its sanctioning bodies shared the same vision of the future of the sport.

The ACO and IMSA may have different goals for the top classes of the World Endurance Championship and the WeatherTech SportsCar Championship, however they have the same needs. In the best interests of the sport, those two organizations should put their own goals aside and concentrate on the common needs and create a common class structure. Instead of having manufacturers divided between two series, it would be better to see them all in both series.

Even if the WEC and IMSA adopted a common class structure, both series could still have their own identities. The WEC would have Le Mans, IMSA would have Daytona and Sebring. While the WEC goes to modern F1 venues around the world, IMSA has old-school road courses and even some street courses in North America. Even with a common class structure, the WEC and IMSA would compliment each other like F1 and INDYCAR do.

Single-race finale should not decide NASCAR championships

The Monster Energy NASCAR Cup Series concludes this weekend with the Ford EcoBoost 400 championship race at Homestead-Miami Speedway. The single race determines the top-four positions between Martin Truex Jr., Kyle Busch, Brad Keselowski, and Kevin Harvick, with the highest finishing of those drivers winning the Cup Series championship.

I am not a huge fan of the NASCAR playoffs as I think they undermine the credibility of the championship. I'd like NASCAR to get rid of the playoffs, or at least not determine the championship in a single race.

Below are the 2017 championship standings leading to Homestead-Miami under some alternative scoring systems, and for comparison the same for 2016. The systems I have used are:

1. Full-season points with no playoffs.
2. 10-race "Chase" between the 16 drivers qualified for the playoffs. The same bonus points are added to the reset points as were added to the reset points in the Round of 16 in that year's playoffs.
3. A playoff format where the Championship 4 carry points from the Round of 8 into the final race. Like in earlier rounds, you advance (win the title) if you win the race, otherwise points will decide.

2017:

If NASCAR had no postseason format and the championship was awarded based on total points, Martin Truex Jr. would have secured the 2017 Cup Series championship after Texas with two races remaining.

A 10-race "Chase" with a points reset before the last ten races would have made the championship somewhat closer, though the championship would still have been decided before the final race as Truex would have secured the title in the penultimate race of the season at Phoenix.

If the points were carried from the Round of 8 but you could win the championship by winning the final race, the championship would be open by definition. Truex would lead the championship by 53 points to Kyle Busch, 57 points to Kevin Harvick, and 80 points to Brad Keselowski. Harvick and Keselowski would need to win at Homestead-Miami to win the championship. Busch could, in theory, win the championship by winning the Stages 1 and 2 and finishing the race in second place, though only if Truex failed to score more than one point.

2016:

If the 2016 season had no Chase, Kevin Harvick would have entered the season finale leading his title rivals Joey Logano by 25 points and Brad Keselowski by 37 points. Harvick would eventually have won the championship by 27 points to Logano whereas Kyle Busch would have beaten Keselowski for the third place. The actual champion Jimmie Johnson would have finished the season eighth in the full-season points.

A 10-race "Chase" with no playoffs would have resulted in a five-way battle for the championship at Homestead-Miami. Kyle Busch would have led Joey Logano by seven points and Matt Kenseth by 26 points. Denny Hamlin and Jimmie Johnson would have had an outside chance, 34 and 39 points, respectively, behind Busch. Eventually, Busch would have won the championship by five points over Logano whereas Matt Kenseth would have beaten Hamlin and Johnson for the third place.

If the Championship 4 had continued from the Round of 8 points in the season finale, Logano would have been leading Kyle Busch by five points. Johnson, 40 points behind, and Carl Edwards, 47 points behind would have been in a must-win situation. As Johnson won at Homestead-Miami, he would have won the championship also in this scenario, though beating other playoff contenders wouldn't have been enough had some non-playoff driver won the race.

Conclusion: Exciting championship doesn't need single-race finale

I think the 2016 season shows NASCAR doesn't need the controversial single-race finish to the championship. Even with the full-season points most championships would go into the final race; before this season 2011 would've been the last time when the title battle would've been mathematically over before the final race. If anything, 2017 has been an exceptional season from Truex and Furniture Row Racing. It wouldn't be the championship format's fault if he was already the champion, the others just haven't been good enough.

That being said, I'd be fine with a 10-race Chase for the Cup like it used to be. Ten races is enough to determine who is the best of the title contenders. There would be enough time to recover from some bad luck, though it would still be an intense title battle.

But I'm starting to dislike the playoffs more and more each year. Playoffs belong to team sports where the teams are divided in multiple conferences and divisions and you need to determine the league champion. The single-race championship finale is what I dislike the most about the playoffs, it's like a single-game Stanley Cup Final after the best-of-seven series in earlier rounds.

However, the NASCAR management seems to embrace the playoffs. Unfortunately, in my opinion. At least this year's format has rewarded success over the full season as the playoff points from the regular season and earlier playoffs rounds are carried throughout the playoffs. But a single race for the title is still a flaw of the format, it undermines the credibility of the championship as an award for the best season.

If the playoffs are in NASCAR to stay, at least I wish the championship would be decided by points unless none of the title contenders win the championship race. If you continued from the Round of 8 points, the championship round would basically be a four-race series for the title unless somebody wins the final race.

Despite Ferrari's quit threat, F1 needs more level playing field

Following the FIA and Liberty Media's release of the planned Formula One engine regulations for 2021 and beyond, the Ferrari president Sergio Marchionne has threatened to leave F1 because of the rules that reduce the powertrain uniqueness between manufacturers.

Ferrari with all its racing heritage is a valuable asset for F1. In an era where the level of the competitiveness of the F1 grid is questionable, traditions help to keep fans committed to the series. However, F1's viewership is in decline and it's obvious something needs to change. F1 needs closer competition. If current manufacturers don't want it, the FIA needs a create a ruleset that attracts other manufacturers and provides closer competition.

The disparity of the grid is a big problem for F1. It's okay to have some disparity, that keeps up the interest in if a team can close the performance gap or even gain an advantage over its rivals. But the disparity of resources is the problem, be it technical resources or financial resources. A series supposed to be the pinnacle of motorsports should be full of teams with the resources to become a championship contender. That's not the case with F1 these days.

F1 also needs more engine manufacturers. None of the seasons in the 2010s have had more than four manufacturers, the lowest since I don't know when. Car manufacturers raise the profile of the series. It would be great for F1 to have rivalries like Honda vs. Toyota, or Mercedes vs. BMW vs. Audi. Also, more manufacturers would mean more publicity for F1 as they would use it in their marketing.

I think F1 would ideally have enough engine manufacturers to have none of them supplying more than two teams. That would be five to seven manufacturers. Given the preferential treatment to the factory teams, the low number of engine manufacturers hurts competition in F1. That being said, no matter how many manufacturers there are, I think the FIA should require the latest-spec engines available also for customer teams.

As for Ferrari, its brand needs top-level racing. Not necessarily in F1, though it's hard to see any alternatives. The World Endurance Championship is a niche sport outside the 24 Hours of Le Mans. Formula E is still hardly a true alternative for F1, the cars are still so much slower. INDYCAR lacks the global exposure and manufacturers are limited to supplying engines there. If Ferrari left F1 for any of those, it would quickly realize people aren't tuning in to watch Ferrari.

None of the existing series suit Ferrari's brand as well as F1 does. Maybe Ferrari will bring up the idea of a breakaway series, though I think it's too big of an undertaking. If F1 is too expensive for most manufacturers at the moment, how could manufacturers that oppose the cost cutting create a new series? Privateer teams would surely not join the breakaway series so each manufacturer should field up to six cars to get the grid filled.

I hope Liberty Media and the FIA will work for a more level playing field in F1. More equal prize money distribution would help to reduce the financial disparity between the teams. The aim of the future regulations should be to reduce the costs, making F1 more affordable and attractive for both new teams and engine manufacturers, while still leaving room for innovation.

Closer financial parity should lead to closer parity also on track. In turn, that should make it easier for the smaller teams to attract sponsors, further closing the financial gap and helping to match the bigger teams in the engineering.

At the moment there are two tiers of teams in F1. Only half of the field has the resources to contend for titles in the near future, the other half of the field is more or less fighting for their existence. The goal for the future of F1 should be a series full of teams with technical and financial resources to contend for championships. That may never have been the case, though that should be the goal anyway.

If F1 can provide attractive racing for the fans, then Ferrari wouldn't be badly missed if it left the series. Though Ferrari wouldn't want to be aside from such an attractive series that's such an important part of its brand. Liberty Media and the FIA must think about the best of the sport, not cater to Ferrari's wishes.

INDYCAR and IMSA need Virtual Safety Car

Jay Frye, President of Competition and Operations, has told INDYCAR is looking for ways to keep the pits open when a caution period comes out, in order to make the running order less random.

I think INDYCAR needs to find a way to keep the pits open under yellow at road and street courses. There have been races every season where a driver lost a likely victory because the race went under a caution right before his pit stop. While you can say the team had the chance to pit the car earlier, races where a caution period produced a random result still undermine the credibility of the series. INDYCAR can provide exciting racing even without caution periods shuffling the running order.

The needs are different for different tracks. On road and street courses as well as on the longest ovals, you can stay on the lead lap after a green-flag stop if you were close enough to the leader. That means you are going to fall behind the pitted lead-lap cars if you stop under the yellow. On short and intermediate ovals you lose a lap or two during a green-flag stop. If you stop under the yellow, the cars that pitted earlier will get a lap back on you but you're still ahead of them.

On road and street courses, the closed pits can destroy your strategy if you had not pitted before the caution came out. Open pits would allow you to lose less track position than if you pit when the pace car has bunched the field. On the other hands, closing the pits is very much necessary on short and intermediate ovals. If you kept the pits open but slowed the cars down when the caution comes out, the cars that pitted under yellow could have gained a lap during a pit cycle on those who pitted under green.

An F1-style virtual safety car procedure is an obvious solution for the road and street courses to keep the pits open when the caution comes out. Instead of rushing into the pits, the cars would be slowed down to a speed safe for the track workers. As the cars that pitted under yellow wouldn't fall into the rear of the pack, the restart order would be more representative of the running order before the pit cycle.

The virtual safety car isn't a completely neutral solution. While closing the pits is costly for drivers who are yet to pit, the virtual safety car reduces the time lost in the pits compared to a green-flag stop. Pitting under the VSC procedure can help you to overtake another car during a pit cycle and even gain some time.

The virtual safety car reduces also the need for the physical safety car. It could be used when local yellows don't properly ensure the safety of track workers but it's a short interruption. For longer interruptions I would still use the physical safety car. It would minimize the gains any driver achieved by pitting under the VSC procedure and it would put the restarts on road courses in line with the oval procedures.

Restart procedures another issue

Closed pits aren't the only problem of INDYCAR's caution procedures, restarts are another issue, especially when it comes to lapped cars.

There may be lapped cars between lead-lap cars in restarts. Those cars would have been there even without the caution so they don't really take away from racing. Though sometimes the lapped cars may race aggressively to get back to the lead lap, like Esteban Gutiérrez did at Mid-Ohio last July.

In restarts with less the 15 laps to go, the lapped cars are moved to the back of the field. That is a bit of a strange rule; it feels a bit like creating a close finish, though you can also see it as a way to ensure the lead-lap cars can race without interference from cars that have no chance for a good result.

In a situation more common on ovals, if a caution came out in the middle of a pit stop cycle, you may end up with the lead-lap cars separated by lapped cars. Assuming all lead-lap cars have pitted under the yellow, the cars between the pace car and the race leader receive a wave-by. While some cars get back to the lead lap in the wave-by, they may still be separated from the leading cars by some lapped cars. An example of that is the race leader Simon Pagenaud and the second-placed Will Power being separated by four cars in a restart at Phoenix last April.

Although it may sound artificial, not having lapped cars between the lead-lap cars in the restarts might be better for the racing. In a way, having the lapped cars between protects the cars that had a big lead to the cars behind before the caution came out. Though if the car ahead really is better, it should be able to successfully defend its position.

Of course, if lapped cars are moved from between the lead-lap cars, it will be more difficult to race back to the lead lap. There should be some rule to give those cars a chance to get back to the lead lap, be it like the lucky dog in NASCAR or the wave-by for the lapped cars in F1.

Of those two, I prefer the lucky dog rule because you need to earn it once you get lapped unlike a systematic wave-by. INDYCAR already has, wrongly, a systematic wave-by, allowing you to get a wave-by and pit under yellow. For example, that allowed Tony Kanaan to recover from two laps down to finish second at Texas last June. If the leader pits from behind the pace car, the lapped cars between the pace car and the new leader get a wave-by. That's the standard procedure in different series, though most series give the wave-by only one lap before going back to green, not enabling a stop under yellow.

IMSA has the same issues

IMSA's caution procedures are closely similar to INDYCAR's, making it different from other major sportscar series.

While most international sportscar series have a virtual safety car procedure that allows keeping the pits open throughout a caution period, IMSA closes the pits until the field is bunched behind the pace car. IMSA's procedures make it easier to gain back laps; all you need is to stay out under the caution and if all lead-lap cars ahead of you pitted you'll get the wave-by. If the pits remained open, you could gain back a lap only if you could unlap yourself when the leader has pitted.

Just like in INDYCAR, IMSA's caution rules make it risky to stay out longer than other cars. Your strategy may be destroyed by a caution period before your stop; if the pits remained open you could pit once the caution comes out and you'd lose less track position.

I think IMSA's caution procedures are flawed. IMSA should follow the likes of the FIA WEC and the Blancpain GT Series and introduce a virtual safety car procedure and possibly also local slow zones.

Different goals, same needs for top sportscar classes

With Porsche leaving the LMP1 class after the current season, Toyota is set to remain as the only OEM brand in the top class of the FIA World Endurance Championship. Meanwhile the IMSA WeatherTech SportsCar Championship will get its fourth OEM in Acura in the top Prototype class for 2018.

Both the ACO and IMSA would surely welcome new manufacturers into their top prototype classes. Yet instead of making the manufacturers choose between the two series, the two sanctioning bodies should unify their regulations to allow manufacturers to participate in them both.

When deciding for the future of top-class prototype racing, the ACO and IMSA should look at what makes GT3 maybe the best class in sportscar racing at the moment. Although GT3 was originally intended to be a class for customer racing, there are some de facto works teams. But also customer teams can succeed in GT3, and selling GT3 cars is a business for the manufacturers.

In a way, IMSA's Prototype class is reminiscent of GT3. The DPi entries are more or less works teams, yet also the privateer LMP2 entries can succeed there. IMSA has probably the healthiest prototype class at the moment; there will be four OEMs represented in 2018, though it's also an affordable class for privateer teams.

While Toyota is set to be the only OEM left in LMP1 in 2018, there are several privateer projects to join LMP1. However, the budget cap between Toyota and those privateers may be too big to provide close racing on track. And even if the privateers could match Toyota in lap times, the hybrid technology allows a better fuel mileage Toyota, putting them at an advantage.

The main goals for the future of the WEC's top class should be affordability and parity. IMSA has achieved that with the DPis and LMP2s, although the parity comes from the Balance of Performance.

LMP1 has featured some of the most advanced technology in all of motorsports. But maybe it would be better for the class to have more cars and closer parity than feature the latest technology. If the WEC got rid of hybrid technology, it might lose Toyota, though it might gain Cadillac, Mazda, Nissan, and Acura from IMSA. Hybrid technology doesn't anymore draw manufacturers; Audi and Porsche left LMP1 for Formula E.

IMSA has a top class that attracts both manufacturers and privateers. That's what the WEC would need. Develop IMSA's prototype class into a global top class and it could be the prototype equivalent to the successful GT3 class. It would be an affordable class for manufacturers and they could even sell cars to privateers who could succeed with them. I'd like to get rid of the BoP, though the rules should remain simple to ensure a close parity of the field.

An aligned class structure would enable the inclusion of Daytona and Sebring in the WEC calendar as co-sanctioned races with IMSA, not as a doubleheader with separate races. A World Championship is supposed to have the biggest races, those two are the biggest races in the USA. Even if the FIA's bureaucracy prevented co-sanctioned races, the same cars could participate in both organizations' races and sportscar racing as a whole would be the winner.

Of course, change takes time. The new LMP1 privateer entrants have entered under the assumption no OEM can enter with a non-hybrid car. Allowing non-hybrid factory cars would not be fair for the new LMP1 privateers. The DPis are designed for a BoP class; getting rid of the BoP would not be fair for those manufacturers.

It may not be the right time to align the class structure in the next few years, though it should be the aim for the near future. The ACO and IMSA may have different goals for their top classes, though the needs are the same; an affordable class for both manufacturers and privateers with parity. GT3 would be a good example of that, apart from the need for the BoP.

GTE vs. GT3 divides manufacturers

Just like prototype racing, also GT racing is divided in two top classes. GTE is the top GT class in the ACO's and IMSA's class structures, though it's GT3 cars that are racing for overall wins in races like the Nürburgring 24h and the Spa 24h.

While both classes are pretty healthy at the moment, the division feels a bit unnecessary. There are some manufacturers (Porsche, Ferrari, Aston Martin, BMW) represented in both classes, though GTE is more of a class for manufacturers with an emphasis on factory programs (Corvette, Ford) and GT3 for manufacturers with an emphasis on customer racing (Audi, Mercedes, etc.).

There are certain differences between GTE and GT3 machines. GTE cars don't have ABS and they are built to stricter rules than GT3 cars which rely more on the BoP to achieve parity. However, also GTE uses the BoP.

Because of the need for the BoP in both classes, I don't really see any reason to keep them separated. The BMW M6 is not built to GTE regulations, though IMSA allowed a modified GT3 car into the GT Le Mans class in the past two seasons. While I like the limited driving aids of the GTE cars, I don't really see the need for the stricter technical regulations given that it's a BoP class.

The ACO surely doesn't have much need for the GT convergence at the moment, given that GTE is a healthy class at the moment and has been gaining new manufacturers. But wouldn't it be great to see Bentleys or McLarens in the GT class at Le Mans, or Corvettes or Ford GTs racing for the Nürburgring or Spa 24-hour wins?

The SRO, the sanctioning body of the Blancpain GT Series, has been trying to preserve the pro-am nature of the GT3 class. That's understandable; as long as there's customer racing, the class is a more sustainable business for the manufacturers. If it gets predominantly factory racing, it's mostly spending for the manufacturers.

I'd like to see a top GT class where each manufacturer has a basic car intended for pro-am racing with an option to upgrade it for all-pro classes. That would be somewhat similar to what BMW has done with the M6 in IMSA. That would also make the factory programs more sustainable, given the customer racing business in GT3.

If all GTE cars were based on a GT3 car, we might see more manufacturers in the GT fields of the WEC and IMSA as well as in Blancpain. Instead of fighting for manufacturers against each other, the sanctioning bodies should try to create regulations that allow participation across different series. The sanctioning bodies may have different goals for their classes but their needs are the same. In a sport like sportscar racing, incompatible class structures do more harm than good.

Time for NASCAR to scrap the playoffs

The Monster Energy NASCAR Cup Series playoffs are well underway as only eight contenders remain for the championship, though I am getting fed up with the playoff implications taking the center stage in the fall races. I have tried to be open-minded about the playoffs, though I just dislike them more and more every year. I would just like to enjoy the races and let the championship unfold naturally without the playoffs.

Kyle Larson, one of only three drivers to win at least four races, not advancing into the round of eight questions the rationality of the playoff format. Martin Truex Jr. has arguably been the best driver of the season and it would feel so wrong if he had one bad race in the playoffs that cost him the title.

The playoffs are just a wrong way to decide the championship. After 35 races, the championship should not come down to which of the four contenders finishes highest in the final race, regardless of their record leading into it.

Even the three-race playoff rounds are too short to determine which drivers will advance. While the playoffs make the championship battle more unpredictable, fans want to see the four best drivers racing for the title in the championship finale. The playoffs don't guarantee that.

NASCAR is suffering from a declining viewership and tries to create excitement with the playoff format. Yet despite all the rule changes for this year, NASCAR's TV ratings have continued to decline. It's time for NASCAR to do away with the gimmicks and make the racing exciting again. The gimmicks only make NASCAR a laughing stock; it's good racing that people want to see.

The playoff format undermines the credibility of the NASCAR championship. The championship should show who was the best driver of the season; with the playoffs that's questionable. I'd prefer a simple full-season championship format, though I'd be fine even with a return to the original 10-race 10-driver Chase for the Cup; 10 races is enough to determine the champion.

As a more radical idea, I'd award the championship to the driver with most wins. In most seasons, the drivers with most wins are separated by only one or two wins and the championship would remain open until the last two races. While it might not reward consistency, I think winning is what racing is all about. The driver who has won most races has done the best job.

The big problem of NASCAR is the on-track product and you can't fix it with the playoffs. NASCAR needs cars that race well. More power, less grip should mean better racing. Make the cars less sensitive aerodynamically to allow closer racing. And add power to make the cars more difficult to drive.

Sometimes I wonder if NASCAR is even worth watching. It's one of the greatest racing series in the world and has some great talent among its drivers. Yet bad racing and an artificial championship format are making it a travesty of a great series. I hope NASCAR can fix itself, though I'm afraid the solutions the management will come up with will only make it worse. I'm not sure how long I want to watch that.

INDYCAR doesn't need Circuit of The Americas

Bobby Epstein, the president of the Circuit of The Americas, has expressed interest in hosting the Verizon IndyCar Series at the Austin venue. Currently COTA hosts the only American rounds of both Formula One and MotoGP as its major events.

Epstein told NBC Sports that finding a suitable date would be difficult, given the F1 date in October and the MotoGP date in April, and the Indy 500 ruling out a May date for INDYCAR at COTA.

While the Texan climate would be uncomfortably hot in the summer months, pairing INDYCAR with the Pirelli World Challenge in late March would seem logical, given the break in INDYCAR schedule then.

However, I don't think INDYCAR should go to COTA. The Texas Motor Speedway president Eddie Gossage has previously threatened to stop hosting INDYCAR if it adds a race at COTA. While objecting a race 220 miles south may be a bit unreasonable, INDYCAR should not risk its longest-standing active oval race outside Indianapolis with a race at COTA.

COTA is the most modern road course in the USA, completed in 2012 for the United States Grand Prix. The layout has been praised for its fast corners, elevation changes, and long straights offering passing opportunities. However, the paved runoffs have been problematic for enforcing the track limits as opposed to most American tracks with grass, gravel, or a barrier lining the track.

Despite COTA's first-class facilities and a praised layout, races apart from F1 and MotoGP have not drawn a big crowd; both IMSA and the FIA WEC will not return to COTA since their first appearances in 2013.

While the track may be great, I doubt COTA would be a good addition to the INDYCAR schedule. It would be like the NASCAR venues where INDYCAR has races, except that it would be an F1 venue instead of a NASCAR venue. Either way, INDYCAR would be a secondary event.

INDYCAR struggles to draw a good crowd at venues hosting also NASCAR. If there's an event the casual fans want to attend, it's the NASCAR Cup race for most of them, not the INDYCAR race. COTA doesn't have NASCAR but it has its own big event, the U.S. Grand Prix. Being one of only three F1 races in North America, it draws fans from all over the country. The poor attendance for the now-discontinued sportscar races implies neither INDYCAR would draw a big crowd at COTA.

While INDYCAR would not be the main event at COTA, it's neither the main event at TMS which has two NASCAR Cup races. The attendance at TMS has not been great in the recent years, although the huge grandstands also make it look even worse. However, INDYCAR needs ovals. While road courses generally have a higher attendance, ovals offer more attractive racing for the TV audience. In 2017, the TMS race was the most-viewed live INDYCAR telecast on NBCSN in the 18-49 age group and another oval race, Pocono, was the most-viewed live INDYCAR telecast on NBCSN in total audience.

I see no reasons to assume COTA would be a better venue for INDYCAR than TMS is. Even if TMS allowed INDYCAR to race at COTA, I'm not sure COTA would be a great addition to the schedule.

INDYCAR is only a secondary event at NASCAR or F1 venues, INDYCAR needs to find markets where it's the biggest racing event, no matter if the venues are ovals or road or street courses. St. Louis is an example of that as INDYCAR's return to Gateway Motorsports Park had a great attendance. The return to Portland in 2018 has potential for the same, given no major racing series has races in the Pacific Northwest. The rumored Nashville street race might also have some potential for INDYCAR, given the closest NASCAR venues are over 200 miles from Nashville.

INDYCAR needs to find growth in new markets. Once it gains mainstream popularity, it will be easier to draw a crowd at venues where NASCAR or F1 is the biggest event.

Mexico City has more potential than COTA

While the addition of COTA doesn't seem very likely in the near future, INDYCAR may still have a race at an F1 venue already next year if Mexico City is added to the 2018 schedule.

While INDYCAR would be a secondary event to F1 also in Mexico City, I think it would be a bigger event there than at COTA. While the USA has 16 INDYCAR races, Mexico would have only one, and it would be the first Indy car race in Mexico since the final Champ Car season in 2007.

If INDYCAR returned to Mexico, there would also probably be Mexican representation in the grid. Although Autódromo Hermanos Rodríguez already hosts Formula One and Formula E as its major events, I believe INDYCAR's return would be such a special occasion that it would draw a good crowd.

On the other hand, INDYCAR at COTA would be nothing special. INDYCAR needs to concentrate on markets where its races are special events.

INDYCAR, F1 need rookies like Wickens, Hartley

There have been two interesting driver announcements in INDYCAR and F1, featuring two former Red Bull juniors. The 28-year-old Canadian Robert Wickens will make his Verizon IndyCar Series debut in 2018 for Schmidt Peterson Motorsports whereas the 27-year-old New Zealand driver Brendon Hartley makes his Formula One debut for Scuderia Toro Rosso at the United States Grand Prix.

Open-wheel prospect Wickens returns from tin-tops

Robert Wickens had a successful series in junior open-wheel series. After finishing third in the 2007 Atlantic Championship, the Canadian headed to Europe and achieved second places in Formula 2 in 2009 and GP3 in 2010 before winning the Formula Renault 3.5 title in 2011.

On his way to the Formula Renault 3.5 title, Wickens beat the likes of Jean-Éric Vergne, Alexander Rossi, Daniel Ricciardo, and Brendon Hartley. Yet that was his last season in open-wheel racing as he spent the following six seasons in the DTM.

Wickens achieved six wins in 84 starts in the DTM and finished fourth in his best season in 2016. Although he was never a title contender in the DTM, his junior open-wheel results allow us to expect good results from him, at least on road courses. The teammate rivalry with the fellow Canadian James Hinchcliffe will be interesting; Wickens beat him in the 2007 Atlantic Championship when they finished third and fourth.

Wickens' decision to join INDYCAR must have been affected by Mercedes' decision to leave the DTM after the 2018 season. However, leaving a factory ride for INDYCAR is a bit of an unusual move; Wickens might have stayed with Mercedes in Formula E or GT series, or might have moved to another manufacturer in the DTM.

Factory teams in touring cars, sports cars, and most recently in Formula E have been the preferred options for most of the open-wheel talent whose F1 chance has gone. Factory teams have been able to provide them the career opportunities that would have been uncertain in privately owned INDYCAR teams.

In that sense, it's a good sign that an INDYCAR team could sign a driver like Wickens who has been a factory driver for Mercedes. While major manufacturers are joining Formula E, INDYCAR teams can hopefully afford to compete for some of the top open-wheel talent from the European ladder system in addition to the Mazda Road to Indy graduates.

Le Mans winner Hartley gets his F1 chance

Brendon Hartley was a test driver for Scuderia Toro Rosso and later Red Bull Racing from 2008 to 2010. However, his results in the feeder series weren't particularly great and he was dropped from Red Bull's junior program.

Hartley continued in feeder series after being dropped from Red Bull's program, though seventh in the 2011 Formula Renault 3.5 series was the best he could achieve since finishing third in 2008 British Formula 3 Championship. Hartley got to drive an F1 car again in 2012 and '13 as a test driver of Mercedes.

However, Hartley has made name for himself in sportscar racing. He joined Porsche's LMP1 program when the manufacturer returned to the top class in 2014. He won the World Endurance Championship in 2015 and is close to a second title this year in addition to the Le Mans victory for Porsche and the Petit Le Mans victory at the wheel of a Nissan DPi in IMSA.

Porsche's LMP1 departure has left Hartley looking for a seat for 2018 and he could be another high-profile driver joining INDYCAR as it looked almost certain he will get the vacant seat at Chip Ganassi Racing. While many recent LMP1 drivers have joined Formula E, it's nice to see INDYCAR is also an attractive series for some of those.

However, getting to drive for Toro Rosso at the US Grand Prix may change the plans as Toro Rosso's 2018 lineup is unconfirmed. My impression is Hartley will drive for Ganassi next year unless he impresses Toro Rosso bosses and can get out of a possible contract with Ganassi.

While it would be nice to see Hartley in INDYCAR, it would be equally nice to see him in F1. Although his junior open-wheel record isn't that impressive, he's been one of the top drivers in LMP1, a class with some of the top talent outside F1. It would be nice to see how a top LMP1 driver would perform in F1.

Hartley would also be an exception to the trend of a manufacturer arranging a young prospect an F1 ride to gain experience. While there are some F2 and even GP3 and F3 drivers who are ready for F1, I don't think F1 is the place to gain experience if you aren't ready yet. I'd rather see those inexperienced drivers spending one or two more years in the feeder series or in a series like the WEC or the DTM.

Welcome to my new blog

Hello all!

Welcome to my new motorsports blog. I have written about motorsports, as well as tennis, winter sports, etc., in my August on Sports blog. Because most of my texts are about motorsports, I decided to start a new blog solely for motorsports.

I have imported my old motorsports texts to the new blog, though they can also be found in my old blog. I will still continue to write about other sports in my old blog, separate from the motorsports texts.

Hopefully you will enjoy my texts,

Kalle August

The Glen's departure opens possibilities for INDYCAR in Pacific Northwest

The 2018 Verizon IndyCar Series schedule has been released. There is only one change, though a very significant one. Portland International Raceway will replace Watkins Glen International which was not satisfied with the Labor Day weekend date.

It is very unfortunate that INDYCAR's latest return to Watkins Glen lasted only for two races and ended one year before the contract was set to expire. The Glen is one of the greatest road courses in North America and in the entire world. It was the iconic host of the United States Grand Prix in the 1960s and '70s.

However, the Glen never became a permanent fixture for Indy car racing like other former F1 venues Long Beach and Detroit did. Indy car races at the Glen have always been short-lived and the latest incarnation was not an exception. If anything, the Glen has become a NASCAR venue in the last decades.

I am not sure the Labor Day weekend date explains the poor attendance. Maybe Watkins Glen just isn't the right kind of a venue for INDYCAR. The location of the Glen is distant from major cities and NASCAR is the big draw there.

While it's unfortunate to see Watkins Glen not in the 2018 schedule, I'm excited to see INDYCAR returning to Portland. Portland hosted American open-wheel racing for over 20 years before it was left out of the schedule following the re-unification in 2008. It may not be as iconic of a track as the Glen, yet Portland has more Indy car history.

I think there are factors that can make Portland a better event than what the Glen would ever have become. Firstly, the location in a city of the size of Portland is better than Watkins Glen's hours away from major cities. Secondly, INDYCAR will be the only major series at Portland International Raceway or even in the entire Pacific Northwest. While the Glen has become a NASCAR venue, Portland used to be an Indy car venue.

Portland kind of reminds of Gateway Motorsports Park as an INDYCAR venue. Both are just outside a major city, both have some previous Indy car history, and INDYCAR is the biggest series at both venues. Gateway had a great attendance for the return of INDYCAR last season, hopefully Portland will be able to replicate that. However, it will require also great marketing like Gateway had.

Maybe that should be INDYCAR's strategy; instead of fighting a losing battle in NASCAR's territory, INDYCAR should look for growth in new markets. That growth would help to make the series more mainstream, making it easier to break through also in NASCAR-dominated areas.

As much as I liked seeing INDYCAR at Watkins Glen, I am fine with Portland replacing it. After two years, the event wasn't working at the Glen and something had to change. I think it's the right move to go to Portland where there is more hope of getting a good crowd. It would be great to have a track like the Glen in the schedule, though most important is having good events.

As for a potential return to Watkins Glen in the future, I'd like it but I am not overly positive. There may not be better calendar slots opening for the Glen in the near future, and even if there was, the crowd might still not be there. The Glen is a great track for Indy cars, yet the series doesn't necessarily need it; CART was great even without the Glen.

Hopefully INDYCAR will get a good crowd next September and Portland will become a successful event in the schedule. With previous racing history but no other major series there, Portland looks like a venue with potential for INDYCAR.

Solid summer ratings for IndyCar on NBCSN

The 2017 Verizon IndyCar Series saw its viewership growing throughout the season. The viewership was down early in the season and the ratings were down for ABC's free-to-air telecasts, yet solid ratings throughout the summer boosted the viewership on NBC's cable channels over the previous years' averages.

The table below shows the viewership in thousands for NBC's cable telecasts.

Click to enlarge

Total Audience Delivery for NBC's telecasts in 2017: 507,000.

• Up three percent on 2016 (492,000; excludes the rain-delayed Texas and Pocono races)
• Down one percent on 2015 (510,000)

Overall average viewership for ABC, NBCSN, and CNBC in 2017: 1.14 million (17 races)

• Down 11 percent on 2016 (1.28 million; 15 races)
• Down 1.7 percent on 2015 (1.16 million; 16 races)

Early 2017 did not look positive for the Verizon IndyCar Series' TV ratings. The ratings for the free-to-air telecasts on ABC were down, as well as the ratings for Long Beach and Phoenix on NBCSN was down. The Honda Indy Grand Prix of Alabama at Barber Motorsports Park was an exception, showing growth of over 60 percent in audience, though it was aided by a NASCAR race having a rain delay.

The Rainguard Water Sealers 600 at Texas Motor Speedway was the first race back on NBCSN after ABC's coverage from Indianapolis and Detroit. The Texas race started a strong streak for IndyCar's TV ratings for the rest of the season; eight of the last nine races had over 500 thousand viewers.

The Honda Indy 200 at Mid-Ohio was the most-viewed IndyCar race on cable in 2017; the live telecast on CNBC had 200 thousand viewers and the tape delayed NBCSN telecast had 576 thousand viewers following a NASCAR race. The most-viewed live telecast was the ABC Supply 500 at Pocono with 618 thousand viewers.

None of the 2017 races could match the most viewed races of the previous two seasons; in 2016 Mid-Ohio had 1.0 million viewers, thanks to the rain delay at a NASCAR race. In 2015 Sonoma had 841 thousand viewers, though the 2015 race took place three years earlier when the football season had not started and there was no NASCAR Cup race that weekend.

Although IndyCar could not achieve its previous top ratings on cable in 2017, the solid ratings since June improved the average audience compared to previous years. The Bommarito Automotive Group 500 at Gateway Motorsports Park was the only race since June with less than 500 thousand viewers as it took place in the same night as the Mayweather-McGregor fight.

Attracting younger generations IndyCar's challenge

While the average audience for the Verizon IndyCar Series on NBC's cable channels grew by eight percent from 2016, the average for those aged between 18 and 49 went down by four percent. Over the full season on ABC and NBC's channels, the 18-49 age group's viewership was down 10 percent. The 18-49 age group made up 22 percent of the IndyCar audience both on NBC's cable channels and on ABC.

The percentage of viewers aged 18-49 is slightly lower for IndyCar than it is for the NASCAR Cup Series or NHRA, for both of which it is around 25 percent. However, IndyCar's open-wheel rival Formula One has over 30 percent of its American viewers aged between 18 and 49. While IndyCar has a slightly higher average audience, F1 has more viewers in the 18-49 age group.

An obvious explanation for the growth of the viewership in the older generations may be that there are fans of Indy car racing that were lost in the split. INDYCAR's aim was to make those lost fans interested in the series again, and the audience growth implies it has succeeded in it. However, there is a younger generation of fans who grew up during the split and were never into Indy car racing. Gaining new fans from the younger generations is the next challenge for INDYCAR.

Gaining young fans is crucial for the long-term future of the series. A series with a good future outlook is also more attractive for sponsors, which in turn will help the series to grow. IndyCar already gets overshadowed by NASCAR in American media; if it can't attract young fans, it will be overshadowed by F1 as well. Then again, if IndyCar could attract young fans like F1 does, it could outnumber NASCAR's Trucks and possibly the Xfinity Series in the 18-49 audience.

Numbers via Awful Announcing, Showbuzz Daily, Sports Media Watch, NBC Sports Pressbox, and Adam Stern on Twitter.

Youngster beats veterans for IndyCar championship

The 2017 Verizon IndyCar Series finished with Josef Newgarden winning the championship. The 26-year-old from Tennessee became the youngest champion since the reunification of American open-wheel racing in 2008 and only the second American to win the title in the reunified era.

Newgarden finds success at Penske right away

Josef Newgarden couldn't have hoped for a better first season at Team Penske. He won already in his third start for the team at Barber Motorsports Park. He returned to the victory lane at Toronto, followed by an impressive victory at Mid-Ohio.

Teammate Will Power denied a third victory in a row at Pocono Raceway, yet Newgarden won once again as the Verizon IndyCar Series returned to Gateway Motorsports Park. The race-winning move on Simon Pagenaud at Gateway ultimately decided the championship in favor of Newgarden.

Team Penske didn't have the pace to win the penultimate race of the season in the mixed weather conditions of Watkins Glen, though Newgarden was on his way to a top-10 finish before his title campaign suffered a major setback. Coming off pit road, Newgarden crashed into the barrier at the pit exit and the lead over Scott Dixon went down from 33 to mere three points.

The season finale at Sonoma Raceway was a dominant performance by Team Penske, presenting Newgarden the perfect opportunity to clinch his first Verizon IndyCar Series championship. He might have had the pace to challenge Pagenaud for the race victory in the final stint, yet the second place was enough for Newgarden to win the series championship.

The only major disappointment in Newgarden's season was the Month of May. Newgarden lacked the pace at the Indianapolis 500 and his race got eventually destroyed in a multi-car crash in a late-race restart.

Defending champion closest rival for new champion

The defending champion Simon Pagenaud completed all laps of the 2017 Verizon IndyCar Series, yet came 13 points short from Newgarden.

Despite the consistency, Pagenaud couldn't repeat 2016's dominant performance of five wins. Pagenaud achieved his first career oval win at Phoenix in April, yet could not win another race before the season finale at Sonoma.

Pagenaud had a chance to win at Gateway, leading the race with 31 laps to go when Newgarden made the aggressive pass on him. The championship could have been different without that pass; Pagenaud lost also the second place to Dixon and lost 15 points to Newgarden. Had Pagenaud won, he would have gained 10 points on Newgarden.

Dixon Honda's lead contender

Chip Ganassi Racing's switch from Chevrolet's package gave Honda its best chance for the championship in years. After his worst season in over a decade in 2016, Scott Dixon was again a contender for his fifth Verizon IndyCar Series title.

Dixon's consistency was comparable to Pagenaud's. The only race where Dixon didn't finish in the top 10 was the Indy 500 where a heavy crash with the lapped Jay Howard ended his race early. Thanks to the safety of today's Indy cars, Dixon didn't suffer major injuries, though the polesitter's hunt for his second 500 victory was over.

The 500 crash was a major blow for Dixon's title campaign as there were double points on offer at Indy. Dixon was still able to enter the season finale at Sonoma only three points behind the leader Newgarden but didn't have the pace to challenge him for the title.

Dixon achieved only one victory in 2017 but it came after a great performance. Having qualified fifth behind the four Chevy-powered Penske cars, Dixon beat them all for the win at Road America.

Castroneves and Power complete Penske's strong effort

All four drivers in Penske's lineup came into the season finale as title contenders. Once again, the series title eluded the three-time Indy 500 winner Hélio Castroneves in what may have been his last full-time season in the Verizon IndyCar Series.

Castroneves came close to matching A.J. Foyt, Al Unser Sr., and Rick Mears with a fourth 500 victory this may, yet instead he was the runner-up for the second time in the last four 500s. The second place still gave him the points lead as he was aiming to win the first series title in his Indy car career of 20 seasons.

Castroneves' title campaign got a boost as he won at Iowa Speedway, ending the drought of over three years. Yet road courses are his weakness; a third place at Road America was Castroneves' best result on road courses.

Even if Castroneves returns for one more full season, his chances to win the elusive series title look slim; his teammates at Penske are all better on road courses and also well capable on ovals. However, the fourth place in the season standings shows Castroneves still deserves a full-time seat in the Verizon IndyCar Series.

Only Newgarden won more races in 2017 than Will Power who celebrated at the Indianapolis road course, Texas Motor Speedway, and Pocono Raceway. Power also claimed six pole positions, more than any other driver.

Power's title campaign suffered many setbacks, many of them not through his own fault. At Barber slow puncture cost him a likely win, and at Gateway the first-lap crash with Ed Carpenter took him out of the race. Despite the three wins, the setbacks were too costly and Power couldn't finish the season higher than fifth in the championship.

Once again Indy 500 victory for Andretti Autosport

For the first time since 2014, three Andretti Autosport drivers finished the season in the top 10; Alexander Rossi in seventh, Takuma Sato in eighth, and Ryan Hunter-Reay in ninth place.

Having won two of the previous three Indy 500s, Andretti once again had a strong effort in the Month of May, strengthened by the two-time Formula One World Champion Fernando Alonso. Yet it was another F1 veteran that claimed the 500 victory for Andretti this year. Having crashed out of the victory battle in 2012, Takuma Sato beat Hélio Castroneves to become the first Japanese Indy 500 winner this year.

As has been the case throughout his career, inconsistency kept Sato out of the title contention. Outside the 500, his best results were two fourth places, and in 10 of the 17 races he missed the top 10.

The 2016 Indy 500 rookie winner Alexander Rossi kept on developing as an Indy car racer. At the penultimate race of the season at Watkins Glen, Rossi achieved his second career INDYCAR victory and the first on a road course as he went on to finish the season as the highest-placed Andretti driver.

For the 2012 series champion Ryan Hunter-Reay, 2017 was the second winless season in a row. His best chance for the win could have been at Indianapolis, yet an engine failure ended his hunt of a second 500 victory.

Rahal turns poor start into solid finish

Takuma Sato will leave Andretti to drive the second car for Rahal Letterman Lanigan Racing in 2018. That should help the team which has struggled at times with setups when running a single car.

RLL's Graham Rahal had a poor start to the 2017 season as his best result in the first four races was a 10th place. The performance improved in the Month of May. Without a late-race puncture, Rahal would have been in contention for the Indy 500 victory.

A week after Indy, Rahal won both of the doubleheader races at Detroit to get back into the title contention. Although he failed to win more races to remain as a title contender, he missed the top 10 only once after Detroit to finish the season sixth in the points after a poor early season.

Chevy outnumbered but not defeated by Honda

Ever since returning to the Verizon IndyCar Series in 2012, Chevrolet has won the manufacturer championship. 2017 was the sixth straight title, even though Honda outnumbered Chevy-powered cars in the field.

The 10 wins of Chevy in 2017 were achieved by the four Penske drivers whereas Honda's seven wins were achieved by six drivers from five different teams. Besides Ganassi, Andretti, and RLL, Dale Coyne Racing achieved a win with Sébastien Bourdais and Schmidt Peterson Motorsports with James Hinchcliffe using Honda power.

Ed Carpenter Racing's J.R. Hildebrand came closest to winning for other team than Penske in a Chevy-powered car as he finished second at Iowa and third at Phoenix. However, his first full-time season since 2012 did not match the expectations set by Josef Newgarden in the same car in the previous seasons. While he had strong results on ovals, he was disappointing on road courses and will be replaced by the Spencer Pigot who showed more promise when driving Ed Carpenter's car on road courses.

A.J. Foyt Enterprises was the third full-time team running the Chevy package. While the team had a poor early season after switching to Chevy from the Honda package, the team improved by the end of the season. The highlight of the season for Foyt was Conor Daly finishing fifth at Gateway, showing competitive pace.

As Honda will continue with all its current teams in 2018, it seems like Chevy's hopes will again rely mostly on Penske. That may play a big role for the future of Castroneves' career. Given that Penske may be the only Chevy team able to beat Honda's top teams, Chevy would surely like Penske keeping the fourth car.

Newgarden leads the next generation of IndyCar

Josef Newgarden winning the series championship is a great finish for the 2017 season. While Fernando Alonso's participation and Takuma Sato's victory in the Indy 500 were great for the international exposure, a young American winning the championship is a great result for a series that needs local stars to succeed in its home market.

As most of the top drivers in the Verizon IndyCar Series are in their late 30s or even 40s, many of whom likely retiring from full-time racing within the next five years, it's good to have top drivers like Newgarden who have 15 years or so left in the sport. And Newgarden is not the only young American star in the series; Graham Rahal and Alexander Rossi are both under 30 and have proven their capability to win.

Strong IndyCar benefits all racing fans

There are not many racing series as prestigious as the Verizon IndyCar Series in the world. Granted, Formula One is the leading series worldwide and NASCAR dominates the American market. Formula E and Super Formula have attracted some of the best open-wheel talent outside F1, though neither of those have the long traditions of Indy car racing.

This year the Verizon IndyCar Series got big worldwide attention as the two-time world champion Fernando Alonso came from F1 to participate in the Indianapolis 500 with McLaren and missed the Monaco Grand Prix. Alonso's participation showed the Indy 500 is still one of the most prestigious races in the world as he aims to complete the Triple Crown with the Indy 500 and 24 Hours of Le Mans victories, having previously won the Monaco GP twice.

As F1 dominates global motorsports and NASCAR the American motorsports, it's the Indy 500 that presents the best opportunity to see big names of those categories in the same race. The 2004 NASCAR Cup Series champion Kurt Busch participated in the Indy 500 in 2014. As the Verizon IndyCar Series is showing signs of growth, one can expect the 500 to become more attractive for crossover entries. Ideally the IndyCar regulars are joined by F1 and NASCAR champions in the 500.

While it's the Indy 500 and not the full series that attracts some of the big names in F1 and NASCAR, it would be great if F1 and NASCAR fans had interest in the Verizon IndyCar Series even when a familiar name isn't running at the 500. I find it unfortunate how some F1 and NASCAR fans ignore IndyCar, yet have time to watch F2 and GP3 or Xfinity and Truck Series.

While F1 and NASCAR don't have a lot in common, the Verizon IndyCar Series has a lot to offer to both F1 and NASCAR fans. It combines open-wheel road racing like in F1 with oval races like in NASCAR. It is always good to have alternatives; IndyCar is an alternative for both F1 and NASCAR. If you're losing interest in F1 or NASCAR, I recommend to you give IndyCar a try, maybe you'll find something you've been missing. And even if you're enjoying F1 or NASCAR, you should give IndyCar a try, maybe you'll find something new that you'll enjoy even more.

Monopolies are hardly ever a good thing; F1 and NASCAR need alternatives. The Verizon IndyCar Series seems like the ideal alternative; it can appeal to both F1 and NASCAR fans, and it has one of the most prestigious races in the world. For example, Formula E appeals to open-wheel but not stock car fans, and it has nothing like the Indy 500. And while endurance racing has famous events, the long races and the emphasis on teams instead of drivers don't really make it appealing to masses. MotoGP is probably the biggest series worldwide behind F1 and offers great racing, though bike racing doesn't appeal to all car racing fans.

If the Verizon IndyCar Series became more of a genuine alternative for F1 and NASCAR, all racing fans would be winners. IndyCar fans would surely love to see their series attracting top talent from F1 and NASCAR. But even F1 and NASCAR fans would benefit from strong IndyCar. With a serious rival, those two series would be forced to keep their fans entertained or the fans would be lost to a rival series. Besides, strong IndyCar should increase the driver crossover with F1 or NASCAR, which would be exciting for fans of all series.

In order to become a strong alternative for F1 and NASCAR, the Verizon IndyCar Series needs to expand its fanbase. There are surely potential IndyCar fans among F1 and NASCAR fans. I hope fans of those series give up any preconception of IndyCar as a minor league and give it a try with an open mind. If you find the unique greatness of Indy car racing, it can even become your favorite series regardless of its status compared to F1 or NASCAR. Trust me, it can happen, I've experienced it.

INDYCAR needs to do away with double points

The 2017 Verizon IndyCar Series goes into the final race with six drivers with a title chance thanks to the double points at the season finale. Despite the excitement they generate for the season finale, double points are one of the most controversial INDYCAR rules.

2014 saw double points introduced for the Formula One World Championship's season finale to keep the championship battle more open until the final race. In the footsteps of F1, double points were also introduced in the Verizon IndyCar Series for the Triple Crown 500-mile races, of which Fontana was the season finale.

A key difference between F1's and INDYCAR's systems was that F1's season finale at Abu Dhabi was a regular race by all means whereas the Triple Crown races were the longest races in the Verizon IndyCar Series. Awarding points based on the race length was not unprecedented in Indy car racing; CART's points system was based on the race length until 1982.

Following lots of criticism, Formula One dropped the double points for 2015 whereas they remained in the Verizon IndyCar Series but with modifications. As Sonoma Raceway became the new venue for the season finale, double points were awarded at Sonoma and at the Indianapolis 500 but no longer at the other Triple Crown 500-mile races.

The 2014 points system with double points for the Triple Crown races had a mixed reception. While many felt it was just a gimmick to keep the championship open in the final race, it was still less controversial than F1's system as the double-points races were the longest ones. The double points, as well as the Indy 500 qualification points, also helped to balance the championship where only six of the 18 races were held on ovals.

The 2015 system, however, was generally disliked. While there were some legitimate arguments in favor of the 2014 double points rule, those arguments were gone with the 2015 rule. It no longer helped to balance the disparity of ovals and road courses as Sonoma was a road course, and it was no longer a system based on the race distance as Sonoma was a regular-distance road race.

Thanks to the double points, six drivers entered the 2015 season finale with a title chance. The season got a controversial finish as Scott Dixon beat Juan Pablo Montoya for the title thanks to his double-points victory at Sonoma.

As Sonoma has remained as the season finale, the double points rule has remained unchanged since 2015. This year, six drivers have a title chance at the final race, and even the third-placed Hélio Castroneves can win the title from 22 points behind Josef Newgarden regardless of other contenders' performances by scoring full points.

Besides Sonoma's double points, the Indy 500's double points and qualification points have a big impact on the championship. The 500 runner-up Castroneves would be out of title contention without Indy's and Sonoma's special points. And while Scott Dixon suffered a heavy crash at the 500 and was classified only 32nd, 42 points for the pole position limited the damage on his championship campaign.

If regular points were awarded at the Indy 500 and Sonoma, Newgarden's lead over Dixon would be 26 points instead of the slim three-point gap. Simon Pagenaud would be 38 points behind Newgarden instead of 34 points, and Castroneves would be 54 points behind instead of 22 points. A top-six finish without double points at Sonoma would secure the title for Newgarden regardless of others' results. Yet because of the double points and the top three within 22 points, anything but winning at Sonoma will put Newgarden at a risk of losing the championship.

I think INDYCAR needs to do away with rules that undermine the series' credibility. Closing the pits when a caution comes out is an example of rules like that, double points is another. As an analogy to team sports, INDYCAR tries to make the season finale a Game Seven of a kind with the double points. But sometimes playoff series get decided in the Game Six and INDYCAR should not create a Game Seven at the expense of credibility.

I would be fine with the double points if the season finished with a 500-mile race on an oval like it did in 2014 when the double points were introduced. A longer race awarding more points is a legitimate reasoning. And while it wouldn't balance the disparity of the ovals and the road courses in the schedule, it would help to achieve a better balance between those in the championship.

Then again, the season finale may well be going nowhere from Sonoma, especially as INDYCAR doesn't want to schedule races further into the fall when the football season has started. A 500-kilometer race at a road course could be equivalent to a 500-mile oval race. Then again, such a long race would hardly boost TV ratings, especially at a track like Sonoma which rarely produces exciting racing, and the double points are exactly intended to increase the viewership.

As for the Indy 500 points system, I'm not a huge fan of the double points if they are not awarded at the other 500-mile races. The Indy 500 is prestigious enough without the double points. Even more I think INDYCAR must abandon or at least reduce the 500 qualification points. 42 points for the 500 pole is more than for a second-place finish at regular-points races, which feels like too much.

The points are a way to bring some excitement into the 500 qualifications, especially as the last two races have had exactly 33 entries and thus no bumping in the qualifications. Though if the car count increased above 33, bumping would bring the sort of excitement that is currently missing from the qualifications, and there would be even less need for the points.

I think INDYCAR needs to do away with the current double points rule, for the sake of credibility. I'm fine with a points system based on the race distance, like awarding double points for all 500-mile races. But as long as the season-finale isn't a 500-mile race, it should not award double points.

If you want to keep the championship open until the final weekend of the season without double points, there is a simple solution, make the season finale a doubleheader. Instead of having a possibly controversial finish to the season, rather give fans one more race to finish the season.