Out in the Garden

It’s always interesting watching how different motorsports series handle the mundane realm of day-to-day operations, including job changes. Moving from team to team seems to be regarded with increasing concern based on the annual cost for a team to compete in a given series.

In NASCAR, stringent rules governing almost all aspects of competition tend to reduce the severity of a resignation - or increase the benefit of a new signing. There have been instances in the past where a team has “found something” – the incredible September sweep of Winston Cup driver “Handsome Harry” Gant and crew chief Andy Petree in 1991, or Kyle Petty’s dominance at the track that was then called North Carolina Motor Speedway in the early 1990s. Still, it’s not at all uncommon to see personnel ranging from crews to crew chiefs cross-pollinating through the NASCAR ranks seemingly at will.

Harry Gant earned the "Mr. September" nickname in 1991.

The opposite is true in Formula One, where annual team budgets regularly exceed staggering figures (think hundreds of millions of dollars). Formula One may be even more closely regulated than NASCAR, but all that funding goes into working within the rules, tunneling deep into the regulations to find tiny openings for technical developments that may yield only a few hundredths of a second advantage per lap. But in a sport where the teams that are given little chance to win are running less than two seconds per lap slower than the elite teams on long road courses, tiny time increments become huge.

With such technical innovations both hideously expensive and jealously guarded, a top team member revealing intentions to move on to a competing team causes a seismic shock. Doubtless the current employer would prefer to simply eliminate the problem in a James Bond fashion (“If I told you, I’d have to kill you…”), but even in F1 – where elaborate espionage plots have played out in the past - there’s no getting away with murder. So the prevailing methodology is to put the traitor out to pasture for as long as possible before freeing him, quarantining him from the advancing march of team technology.

Paddy Lowe, seen celebrating a victory with McLaren driven Jenson Button in 2012, will have a much quieter 2013.

Such a situation is playing out now, even before the first competition of the 2013 F1 season this weekend in Australia. McLaren’s technical director, Paddy Lowe, intends to follow driver Lewis Hamilton from the British team to rival Mercedes. While drivers have some freedom of movement when it comes to employment, it’s also true that their byte-level familiarity with technical details is usually small. Hamilton, after all, was released by McLaren and allowed to climb out of the MP4-23 for the last time in November and go right to work testing his new ride weeks later. But what does Lowe know about McLaren? Simply everything.

Consequently, Lowe will be spending 2013 not attending McLaren’s F1 races but whiling away his time on what is amusingly referred to as “gardening leave.” It’s a period of isolation from his employer’s competition secrets before McLaren is forced to release him from employment at the end of the year. Team principal Martin Whitmarsh, while announcing Tim Goss would immediately take over the team’s reins as technical director, had little to say of his predecessor: "Paddy Lowe will be performing a different role within McLaren until the end of the year.” In other words, working in the garden.

Perhaps in F1 more than any other racing series, such personnel policies offer proof that knowledge is indeed power.

Just another street car...

OK, The View from the Pits is supposed to focus on motorsports, but sometimes we need to relax the regulations a bit. Case in point: the Lamborghini Veneno.

The Geneva auto show opens to the public on Thursday, and the event is known for debuting some of the most over-the-top supercars imaginable. Among the cars to be revealed this year is the new McLaren P1, with production limited to 375 units at about $1.3 million each. But even those heady figures are eclipsed by the Veneno, likely the most amazing supercar to emerge from Lamborghini’s Sant'Agata Bolognese, Italy headquarters.

Bearing a price tag of roughly $4 million per vehicle – hey, carbon-fiber aint cheap! - Lamborghini will produce just three of these cars. And they are indeed cars, although they certainly look like they could fly.

With a 6.5-litre V-12 making the muscle, the Veneno is expected to top out at roughly 220 mph.

If any of The View from the Pits readers ends up with a Veneno and would like to offer a test drive to see if we can actually reach that lofty velocity, feel free to get in touch. Please!

It’s beginning to look a lot like NASCAR – again.

I was recently watching an old videotape of the Winston Cup Series running at Talladega, Alabama in May, 1992. Yes, that almost seems to be the dark ages from our vantage point more than two decades later. But it was a pretty thrilling spectacle, and a milestone along the way leading to an incredible championship battle, with the season-long victory claimed by the late Alan Kulwicki in the last race of the year.

1991 Winston 500 winner “Handsome Harry” Gant finished deep in the field a year later, while Dale Earnhardt claimed a top five.

As the laps of the Winston 500 ticked down to reveal a hard-fought win by Davey Allison that long-ago May afternoon, I recognized all of the drivers and their numbers. But what struck me just from casual glances at the screen were two things in particular. One was how easy it was to differentiate a Thunderbird from a Lumina and a Grand Prix from a Cutlass. The other? How cool all these cars looked as stock car racers.

Fast forward to 2008 and, along with a new title for the series thanks to Sprint, here comes the Car of Tomorrow. I get all the reasons that drove the development and implementation of this vehicle – wider, sturdier, and safer. But holy smokes – has there ever been a more uninspiring flock of “stock cars” to roll onto a superspeedway?

OK, it’s safer – but do I have to look at it?

I’ve complained about NASCAR plenty since Dale Earnhardt Sr. was killed at Daytona. In my opinion, the sport of stock car racing’s top series began to drift away from what made it great in a cloud of marketing and a head-on frenzy to expand – and the revolting appearance of the Car of Tomorrow only made things worse.

But credit where it’s due: watching this year’s testing sessions at Daytona International Speedway brought back that old exciting feeling. The work in progress that has been the Car of Tomorrow has evolved from the ugly ducklings of that initial season to the real race cars I saw blasting around those famed high banks. The Gen-6 (“sixth-generation”) cars look like the real deal, and perception can indeed become reality.


　

“Hey, this looks like… a real stock car!” That it is…

Folks, the stock car is back, and boy did I miss it! Now if we could just get away from tongue-twister race names like “The Sprint Unlimited At Daytona” and return to the simplicity of monikers like “Bud Shootout…”

Well, one step at a time.

"I dunno... Let's just try it!"

When I was a kid in the late 1960s, I was as much into drag racing as I was music (a passion that also lives on; please visit my http://FrankBlankMusic.blogspot.com  site for more on that realm).

The two interests make a lot of sense now as I look back on that era. Both drag racing and rock music were seeing cataclysmic upheavals in all aspects, reflecting the wild times of American culture in general.

Two things in particular characterized drag strip culture in that era: a sense of wild innovation, and an appreciation of the importance of show biz.

Computer say, driver do: drag racing in the modern era...

Modern drag racing is similar to the other big budget sports - those big sponsorships demand professionalism and consistency of results. Anything that results in a dragster going faster now is most likely an innovation emerging from computer diagnostics.

John Peters' historic "Freight Train," restored for the enjoyment of future generations. Groundpounder, indeed...

In the late 1960s, though, computers took up entire rooms and were the domain of the pocket protector gang. Out at the strip, “going faster” was something obtained - or totally missed - by best guesses. “Hey, that thing goes pretty fast with one engine. What if we put in two?” Or, “Well, it looks aerodynamic to me.”

Tommy Ivo's attempt at implementing advanced aerodynamics: fail. Says Ivo today, "What a ride! This was it! The only thing that made me mad was I got so scared I closed my eyes and missed the whole show!"

What hurts drag racing today is that there’s little reward in trying out wild ideas. There are banks of data that answer all the questions before attempts are ever made, with the result that everybody’s running just about the same thing.

It’s rare to see something startling on the track. In the late 1960s, it was almost expected.

Of course, earlier I mentioned the show biz aspect. We’ll take a peak at that down the road, but here’s a hint of what I’m talking about!

Just another day at the office...

 

 

Return to action...

There are few things sadder on the Internet than a blog that’s fallen into inactivity, digital cobwebs hanging from that distant date in the past when the content was last updated…

Well, as Patti Smith exclaimed upon her return to the stage after breaking her neck in a fall: “Out of traction, back in action!”

My blog silence was not the result of a medical condition (fortunately!). Instead, I had the opportunity to focus on one area of my range of interests, and it demanded full attention. So I’ve spent much of the last nine months living in the past while working on the music of my band of the 1980s, Informed Sources. This effort ranged from mixing studio multitrack tapes and preparing for a commercial release to practicing and playing a one-off show in Philadelphia. And, of course, there was the creation of a Web site: www.FrankBlankMusic.com

But after all those weeks playing the roles of recording engineer, art director, sales manager, web developer, publicist, logistics coordinator – oh, and guitarist! – it’s time to end the hiatus and dust off these blogs.

Keyboard, computer, action!

Chaos versus Stability: Racing in the Headlines for All the Wrong Reasons

In racing, it’s almost never a good thing to be in the news. Maybe your series generating a sports headline isn’t so bad, but to be at the top of the mainstream news? In motorsports, that can only mean disaster.

Such was the case this morning when the CNN.com banner headline read “Body found as Bahrain Grand Prix tensions mount.”

It's been said there is no such thing as bad publicity. Many involved with F1 this weekend might beg to differ...

While the 2012 NASCAR Sprint Cup campaign rolls relatively quietly into Kansas, on the other side of the world the drivers and crews of Formula 1 are likely more concerned about their personal safety than any worries about how they’ll perform in the next race. This weekend in Bahrain, those in the trenches of F1 find themselves immersed in volatile and dangerous waters of political conflict and national unrest.

Amidst protests over the country’s rulers, the Bahraini government has responded with violent crackdowns that have focused critical international attention on the small island nation located in the Gulf of Bahrain off the coast of Saudi Arabia.

The conflict has had an impact on Formula 1 long before this weekend. Pre-season testing scheduled for the Bahrain track before the 2011 season was cancelled, and the 2011 season itself was scheduled to open with the Bahrain Grand Prix. The conflicts drove a postponement of the race to October, and eventually its cancellation.

The dubious decision to return to Bahrain in 2012 is playing out just as many within the F1 realm had feared: the sport is now the focus of countless “why are they racing there?” editorials. Unfortunately, there is no good answer.

For the race teams that are obligated to compete, it is an extremely uncomfortable situation. The Force India team completely skipped the second pre-race practice sessions, with rumors whispered that the team felt it was safer to be ensconced in the security of their lodging than to be at the track.

For NASCAR fans, such chaos is unimaginable. Each year the stock car schedule is released with a stable predictability that seldom yields a surprise. And disruptions at NASCAR events are generally limited to rain. In fact, the most exotic aberration on the Sprint Cup Series schedule came in 1998 with a summer Daytona race postponement to October 17 due to smoke from wildfires that were raging in central Florida.



The simple postponement of a night race due to wildfire smoke is a major disruption in NASCAR's book. This weekend F1 is rewriting the book on racing upheavals.

The fact that NASCAR racing is a domestic US product certainly works in that entity’s favor as far as being able to maintain control. For Formula 1, treading on the world stage sometimes places the series into logistical and cultural upheavals.

But in the case of the Bahrain situation and the entirely dubious decision to proceed with the event this weekend, Formula 1’s leaders appear to have recklessly - and foolishly - placed their teams and the sport’s very reputation into jeopardy. Instead of a glamorous grand prix held in an impossibly rich environment, the Bahrain Grand Prix has morphed into a conundrum with no positive outcome imaginable.

Should I Stay or Should I Go?

As the field swept under the white flag early Tuesday morning – nearly seven hours after the drivers in the 54th Daytona 500 took the green flag to begin The Greatly Delayed American Race – Greg Biffle’s mind must have been racing nearly as fast as his Ford Fusion.

What to do, what to do?

As the field takes the final green flag of the 2012 Daytona 500, Kenseth in the 17 is about to move high, pick up Biffle's 16, and drop back to the inside lane. Dale Jr. in the 88 would tag along, offering Biffle tempation. (Getty Images for NASCAR)

A decision was required, and there was not much time to make it. In the time it took to read that last sentence, Matt Kenseth, Biffle, and Dale Earnhardt Jr. – cars 17, 16, and 88 - had already entered turn one, arcing toward turn two as the three cars led the final lap of the Daytona 500.

Biffle’s teammate, Kenseth, had already won the 2009 Daytona 500, the event every driver wants to win. To come close but to fall short in the 500 – that can haunt a driver for the rest of his life. Victory just might be within Biffle’s grasp, but there were serious consequences to be considered.

What if he pulled out with Jr. closed up on his tail, passed Kenseth, and won the 500? Kenseth might not be too thrilled, but team owner Jack Roush might be forgiving… But what if he pulled out, and made the pass – only to see Jr. sweep by, to claim his own first 500 win, putting a Chevrolet in victory lane at the expense of Ford? Biffle might need one of Roush’s P-51 warbirds to escape his owner’s wrath. Not a very good scenario to begin the 2012 season.

Tough choices, indeed, and now the trio had consumed the second turn, rocketing into the backstretch and toward the jet-fuel-charred turn three. Time was running out.

Down the straightaway Biffle made a slight move to his right – maybe three feet – and swung back behind Kenseth. Another swing to the right, perhaps just one foot… And that was it. Biffle was back behind the 17, his left tires maintaining a consistent distance from the yellow lines through turns three and four. Exiting four Dale had no choice but to make his move if he wanted anything other than third place. He passed Biffle but was unable to close on Kenseth before the cars hit the finish line in the tri-oval.

It was over.

Kenseth cruises, Dale Jr. makes a move for second, Biffle settles for third. (Getty Images for NASCAR)

A disappointed Earnhardt climbed from his car, runner-up in the Daytona 500.

"He's trying to do what he could do,” Earnhardt surmised of Biffle’s motives afterward. “If I were him, I can't imagine what his game plan was in his head, but if I were him, I would have tried to let me push him by and then pull down in front of Matt, and force Matt to be my pusher and then leave the 88 for the dogs."

Biffle himself put on a brave face, insisting everything had gone according to plan and he’d done all he could do.

"When I moved over, Matt just moved over real easy, and Junior is against my back bumper, so I'm trying not to wreck because he's shoving on me,” Biffle said. “And I'm like, 'I'm not going to be able to get a run at him.'"

So those are the comments for the record. What’s unknown is what would have happened if Biffle had pulled out and made the move. Would he have sailed by Kenseth, dropped in front of his teammate, leaving the 88 car in his wake, just as Jr. speculated? Or would the move have played directly into Dale’s hands, the 16 and 88 taking the 17 but leaving Jr. just enough time to pass Biffle, his benefactor? It wasn’t out of the question, especially in light of Kyle Busch’s winning pass in the Budweiser Shootout…

We’ll never know.

In Formula 1 racing, the topic of “team orders” often engenders controversy. A driver being order to hold his position or yield to his teammate has long been part of the game in a form of motorsports where glory for the team supplants individual accomplishment.

In NASCAR, teams and drivers have historically been left to police themselves. But on this early February morning, it’s within the realm of possibility that team realities trumped any potential outcomes.

.