The date change of the Fuji round of the FIA World Endurance Championship has left many drivers and fans disappointed as the new date will clash with IMSA's Petit Le Mans as well as Super GT's Autopolis round. While the new date will allow Fernando Alonso to compete the full season at the wheel of Toyota's LMP1 car, the date change creates a clash for many drivers who have a dual campaign in the WEC and IMSA or Super GT.
For sure it will be a boost for the WEC's attention to have a driver like Fernando Alonso contending for a world championship in another series besides F1. But after originally choosing the Fuji date exactly to avoid the clash with Petit Le Mans, the FIA and the ACO have betrayed the sportscar community with this date change, catering only to one star driver's needs.
Sportscar racing is a niche sport within all of motorsports and it is divided between multiple organizations. To help to grow the sport, the organizations need to co-operate in scheduling (as well as other things). Many drivers and even some teams compete in multiple series. I'm sure the WEC fans have happily seen drivers like Mike Conway in IMSA's endurance races and André Lotterer in at the wheel of GT cars at Spa and Nürburgring. Interestingly, Alonso's teammate Conway is one of the drivers affected by the date change since he's an additional endurance driver for Action Express Racing in IMSA.
As the WEC is changing to a winter schedule, it shouldn't be too difficult to create schedules with IMSA to avoid conflicting dates. Super Formula and Formula E already avoid clashes with the WEC. The two leading sportscar championships, the FIA WEC and IMSA's WeatherTech Championship, should do that for each other's schedules to enable drivers' dual campaigns. If the WEC tries to avoid conflicting dates with F1, it becomes more difficult as F1's schedule is only likely to grow and the FIA only requires it to avoid a clash with the 24 Hours of Le Mans. And anyway, an active F1 driver competing full-time also in the WEC will still likely remain very unusual despite Alonso's 2018-19 campaign.
It's not only the WEC to blame. Fortunately it hasn't been the case in last two years but there have been cases of an IMSA race in the same weekend with the Total 24 Hours of Spa, with drivers missing that weekend's IMSA race. The Spa and Nürburgring 24-hour races are the biggest GT races in the world where major manufacturers want to field the best drivers from their payroll. Blancpain GT Series had originally scheduled their Silverstone round in the same weekend with this year's Nürburgring 24 Hours, yet it did the right thing and changed the Silverstone date to allow drivers as well as teams to race at Nürburgring.
Having accepted Fuji's date change, the FIA and the ACO seem very ignorant towards sportscar drivers and other series, abandoning the original plan of avoiding a Petit Le Mans clash. The WEC organizers have obviously asked IMSA to change the Petit Le Mans date now to not clash with the WEC at Fuji, though IMSA should really not let fans down with a date chance at this point. Some fans had already booked a trip to Japan for the WEC, only to see the date changed now. IMSA must not do the same for the fans going to attend Petit.
Sunday, February 11, 2018
Tuesday, December 12, 2017
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
 |
| 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.
Thursday, December 7, 2017
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.
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 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.
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.
Saturday, December 2, 2017
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
Friday, November 17, 2017
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.
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.
Thursday, November 16, 2017
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:
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.
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.
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.
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:
- Full-season points with no playoffs.
- 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.
- 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.
Friday, November 10, 2017
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)