Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Just cause someone set me off
"I can turn a car that's shaped like a cross between a taxi and a tank to the LEFT, with the help of a track that's shaped like A BOWL. I am the GREATEST DRIVER of ALL TIME!!!"
Sunday, April 20, 2008
The reality behind Danica's win
So, she "finally" did it, as she so eloquently put it. She finally got the monkey off her back, and a woman has won a race in the top tier. It has been accomplished.
And it was done, I would like to scream to high heaven, by brains.
I am not a Danica fan; I am not anti-Danica, either. If she can accomplish it, she can; if she can't, she can't. It may sound boring, but those are truly my beliefs: she is a racing driver, no more, no less.
Did I doubt Danica would ever win a race? Absolutely. Was I a critic? Hopefully in the constructive sense, but yes. Constructive, as opposed to un-, by pointed commentary about what both her strengths and weaknesses are, and how to go about capitalizing or minimizing them. Granted, I'm not a crew chief myself...but strategy is strategy.
Danica Patrick has never accomplished some mind-numbing, nerve-shattering move when the chips are down to win a race, in her career, as of the morning of the day the last CART race will be run, April 20, 2008. The Hornish moves in the final 2 laps of the 2006 Indianapolis 500-Mile Race have not been her forte, let alone the finish of the 1989 500. In head-to-head combat in this very race, she was not only not the fastest car, she wasn't the fifth fastest car. She was top ten, at best.
But that, gloriously, does not matter. What matters is that she and her crew chief played it smart. If you can't outrun them, outlast them; simple as that. When seeing an opportunity, adapt to it. That caution offered one, and they took it. And good on them: welcome to the world of Sun Tzu, where it does not go to the fastest or the strongest, but the best...based on what best means.
If this sounds all philosophical, it is: I love open-wheel motorsports because it allows philosophy in ways that Certain Other Forms of the Sport (COFS) haven't, since about February 25, 2001, one week after. Instead of people bitching that such and such was a "boring race run on fuel mileage," in open-wheel they ADMIRE such forethought. That it happened to be by the team of a woman who's been spread in the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition, useful gravy for marketing.
The reality behind Danica's win is that they won through what is her strength: her ability to hit the marks time after time, smooth as ice. The numbing outside-bomb runs like Michael Andretti and Rick Mears pulled off in 1991, not likely (yet, anyway). The pulverizing domination of Mario Andretti in 1987, likewise...especially not in such a hopefully-fading-in-favor-of-innovation era of clone cars. Repetition, smoothness, calm; that's Danica at her best. And they hit the fuel mark exactly, and it paid off.
Do I think Danica is destined to garner a bunch of wins throughout her career? No, actually. I think the competition at the highest levels is only going to intensify, and I think it microscopically telling that the race she wins is the last divided race, between two fields. Put an oval-experienced Justin Wilson, Will Power, Graham Rahal or Oriol Servia in there with the Castroneveses, Kanaans, Dixons and Wheldons (and Andretti's, as soon as Marco reestablishes the form that saw him take second at Homestead)? I think the sheer weight of it makes the demand that either Danica raise her game (which was not raised with this win, btw)...or never win again. In this brave new world, I think wins, not just for Danica but for anyone, are going to become a lot more rare, precious, and if one entry continually wins time after time, it'll be because of the car side of the 50/50 equation. Like F1, in other words.
But this one time, they did it right: they played to her strength, downplayed her weakness. And she succeeded...which is a boon to anyone who has gotten tired of hearing about the drama of when she'll ever win, and would like everyone to be treated as what they are: competitors.
On to Long Beach, and the final end to the bloody Split. Here's to "...a better world, with better people living in it."
Hurrah for the men of the cast-iron chariots.
And it was done, I would like to scream to high heaven, by brains.
I am not a Danica fan; I am not anti-Danica, either. If she can accomplish it, she can; if she can't, she can't. It may sound boring, but those are truly my beliefs: she is a racing driver, no more, no less.
Did I doubt Danica would ever win a race? Absolutely. Was I a critic? Hopefully in the constructive sense, but yes. Constructive, as opposed to un-, by pointed commentary about what both her strengths and weaknesses are, and how to go about capitalizing or minimizing them. Granted, I'm not a crew chief myself...but strategy is strategy.
Danica Patrick has never accomplished some mind-numbing, nerve-shattering move when the chips are down to win a race, in her career, as of the morning of the day the last CART race will be run, April 20, 2008. The Hornish moves in the final 2 laps of the 2006 Indianapolis 500-Mile Race have not been her forte, let alone the finish of the 1989 500. In head-to-head combat in this very race, she was not only not the fastest car, she wasn't the fifth fastest car. She was top ten, at best.
But that, gloriously, does not matter. What matters is that she and her crew chief played it smart. If you can't outrun them, outlast them; simple as that. When seeing an opportunity, adapt to it. That caution offered one, and they took it. And good on them: welcome to the world of Sun Tzu, where it does not go to the fastest or the strongest, but the best...based on what best means.
If this sounds all philosophical, it is: I love open-wheel motorsports because it allows philosophy in ways that Certain Other Forms of the Sport (COFS) haven't, since about February 25, 2001, one week after. Instead of people bitching that such and such was a "boring race run on fuel mileage," in open-wheel they ADMIRE such forethought. That it happened to be by the team of a woman who's been spread in the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition, useful gravy for marketing.
The reality behind Danica's win is that they won through what is her strength: her ability to hit the marks time after time, smooth as ice. The numbing outside-bomb runs like Michael Andretti and Rick Mears pulled off in 1991, not likely (yet, anyway). The pulverizing domination of Mario Andretti in 1987, likewise...especially not in such a hopefully-fading-in-favor-of-innovation era of clone cars. Repetition, smoothness, calm; that's Danica at her best. And they hit the fuel mark exactly, and it paid off.
Do I think Danica is destined to garner a bunch of wins throughout her career? No, actually. I think the competition at the highest levels is only going to intensify, and I think it microscopically telling that the race she wins is the last divided race, between two fields. Put an oval-experienced Justin Wilson, Will Power, Graham Rahal or Oriol Servia in there with the Castroneveses, Kanaans, Dixons and Wheldons (and Andretti's, as soon as Marco reestablishes the form that saw him take second at Homestead)? I think the sheer weight of it makes the demand that either Danica raise her game (which was not raised with this win, btw)...or never win again. In this brave new world, I think wins, not just for Danica but for anyone, are going to become a lot more rare, precious, and if one entry continually wins time after time, it'll be because of the car side of the 50/50 equation. Like F1, in other words.
But this one time, they did it right: they played to her strength, downplayed her weakness. And she succeeded...which is a boon to anyone who has gotten tired of hearing about the drama of when she'll ever win, and would like everyone to be treated as what they are: competitors.
On to Long Beach, and the final end to the bloody Split. Here's to "...a better world, with better people living in it."
Hurrah for the men of the cast-iron chariots.
Sunday, April 6, 2008
Memphis, Kansas, and auto racing
In the aftermath of what http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=3332081&sportCat=ncb describes as a NCAA Men's Final Four in need of saving this Monday night, I thought long and hard about what it is that might really need saving in the 21st century sports world that we inhabit. Fast breaks, legendary deep passes, impossible points and veritable gamut of explosions aside...for all the entertainment qualities that sports can provide, I had to ask myself, while reading that article, one very simple question.
So?
There are two definitions of the word Sport in modern American English. People believe in one or the other, but never both; if they give you lip service to the contrary, it means they're either lying to you, believe in the first of the two I will name (most likely this one), or simply don't understand the vital differences between the two. Either way, there are two.
1) Sport: action undertaken for fun and leisure.
2) Sport: rule-regulated competition.
Simple as that. It cannot be both.
Sports cars provide a good lense through which to view this. The commercials attempting to sell sports car can and will advertise the former, always. Taking a high-octane, never-mind-the-fuel-mileage machine out to turn fast speeds in the wild plains or wilderness of the Great American West or, now, the concrete jungle highways of one of the Gigantic Supercities...living a life free of responsibility, free of worry...all of that makes it into sports car commercials. It sells.
On the other hand, sports cars are raced, as well. The "prototype" inventions of such teams as Audi, in the American Le Mans Series, provide a suitably exotic appearance to catch the eye of even the most jaded viewers. With just how ALIEN some of those machines look, while still being SPORTS cars, it places the definition of the term Sport securely in the latter of those two above. They are built the way they are to win: sport...rule-regulated competition.
I myself believe, to a religious degree, in the latter. People who want to play fast and loose with rules, who want to just make shit up as they go, will find not only no sympathy from me, they will find only derision. Or, better said, if two men named Mr. Barnum & Mr. Bailey believed in just doing whatever is necessary to attract the crowds to sell those tickets and make some money...the same mindset used so often in the ancient Roman Colosseum, al la Bread & Circuses...then here's wishing I could've been there to personally assassinate either of them, and by all means, Bring On The Barbarians.
Sport should be governed by rules. Changing rules to suit need for entertainment is only valid (not to say it doesn't happen, mind you) when it means making a better GAME: a better competition. Doing it in order to sell more seats is the path to the madness of relativism...and to all you people out there who have EVER seen or competed in a baseball game in your life, I'll put it this way: imagine a world where all stats have become meaningless.
That's the future of a world where everyone pines for the next exciting thing, and who gives a damn about the rules in the process. That's the NASCAR future, among other things: a future of emptiness. I for one don't want that future. I for one don't want to tell others "meh, it's just my thing that I like." I'd prefer to say "Here's why it matters. Here's why Ted Williams was one of the most astounding hitters in the history of major league. Here's why the legends of Bill Vukovich and Frank Lockhart are so incredible. Here's meaning."
The Memphis Tigers and Kansas Jayhawks played better, in their blowouts of UCLA and North Carolina, respectively. They will face each other for the National Collegiate Athletic Association's 2008 Division I-A Men's Basketball Championship Monday night. I do not care who wins, as regards this post. The fact that by the rules of the game, they played accurately, aggressively, and good enough to both blow away their opponents is the point: as it should be in automobile racing. Both are sports; may the best participant, be they the best by outright talent (driver skill or technology, in racing) or by strategic moves, win. Period. If either Memphis or Kansas destroy the other in the Monday night game, the moral is this: one team was that much better, this year. Next year will be different, either a little or a lot. Just like in racing.
Let the fools have nonstop excitement. I'll take real, with a dash of meaning, thank you.
So?
There are two definitions of the word Sport in modern American English. People believe in one or the other, but never both; if they give you lip service to the contrary, it means they're either lying to you, believe in the first of the two I will name (most likely this one), or simply don't understand the vital differences between the two. Either way, there are two.
1) Sport: action undertaken for fun and leisure.
2) Sport: rule-regulated competition.
Simple as that. It cannot be both.
Sports cars provide a good lense through which to view this. The commercials attempting to sell sports car can and will advertise the former, always. Taking a high-octane, never-mind-the-fuel-mileage machine out to turn fast speeds in the wild plains or wilderness of the Great American West or, now, the concrete jungle highways of one of the Gigantic Supercities...living a life free of responsibility, free of worry...all of that makes it into sports car commercials. It sells.
On the other hand, sports cars are raced, as well. The "prototype" inventions of such teams as Audi, in the American Le Mans Series, provide a suitably exotic appearance to catch the eye of even the most jaded viewers. With just how ALIEN some of those machines look, while still being SPORTS cars, it places the definition of the term Sport securely in the latter of those two above. They are built the way they are to win: sport...rule-regulated competition.
I myself believe, to a religious degree, in the latter. People who want to play fast and loose with rules, who want to just make shit up as they go, will find not only no sympathy from me, they will find only derision. Or, better said, if two men named Mr. Barnum & Mr. Bailey believed in just doing whatever is necessary to attract the crowds to sell those tickets and make some money...the same mindset used so often in the ancient Roman Colosseum, al la Bread & Circuses...then here's wishing I could've been there to personally assassinate either of them, and by all means, Bring On The Barbarians.
Sport should be governed by rules. Changing rules to suit need for entertainment is only valid (not to say it doesn't happen, mind you) when it means making a better GAME: a better competition. Doing it in order to sell more seats is the path to the madness of relativism...and to all you people out there who have EVER seen or competed in a baseball game in your life, I'll put it this way: imagine a world where all stats have become meaningless.
That's the future of a world where everyone pines for the next exciting thing, and who gives a damn about the rules in the process. That's the NASCAR future, among other things: a future of emptiness. I for one don't want that future. I for one don't want to tell others "meh, it's just my thing that I like." I'd prefer to say "Here's why it matters. Here's why Ted Williams was one of the most astounding hitters in the history of major league. Here's why the legends of Bill Vukovich and Frank Lockhart are so incredible. Here's meaning."
The Memphis Tigers and Kansas Jayhawks played better, in their blowouts of UCLA and North Carolina, respectively. They will face each other for the National Collegiate Athletic Association's 2008 Division I-A Men's Basketball Championship Monday night. I do not care who wins, as regards this post. The fact that by the rules of the game, they played accurately, aggressively, and good enough to both blow away their opponents is the point: as it should be in automobile racing. Both are sports; may the best participant, be they the best by outright talent (driver skill or technology, in racing) or by strategic moves, win. Period. If either Memphis or Kansas destroy the other in the Monday night game, the moral is this: one team was that much better, this year. Next year will be different, either a little or a lot. Just like in racing.
Let the fools have nonstop excitement. I'll take real, with a dash of meaning, thank you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
