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.