IndyCar Firestone 600 postscript

Scott Dixon

We’ve seen this movie before. Call it The Dixon Supremacy, The Dixon Ultimatum, The Dixon Double-Re-loaded Matrix or whatever. But for seemingly the umpteenth thousandth time, Scott Dixon eviscerated the Verizon IndyCar Series field with his trademark surgical precision in winning Saturday’s Firestone 600.

Like the bank robber already three states away by the time anyone even realizes a single dollar is missing, Dixon left many an IndyCar race winner scratching their heads as to how exactly he and Team Ganassi solved the riddle that was Texas Motor Speedway Saturday evening.

Yes, nothing particularly new. That column has been written before.

What perhaps was new was not the movie itself, but the theatre in which it occurred. We’re used The Dixon Movie at say, Mid-Ohio or Watkins Glen.

Sure, we’d witnessed a different type of racing at Texas Motor Speedway the past three years since the advent of the DW12. However, for the longest time the big track in the big state with the big banks, big scoreboard and big talking Big Boss was synonymous with big packs, big crashes, and big drama. Saturday, as Dixon and his partner in crime Mike Hull orchestrated, TMS felt more like well, Mid-Ohio, than TMS.

And one has to wonder: is that a good thing?

As good as Dixon was, l would agree that unless you were paying attention to certain subtle (really subtle) nuances that weren’t discussed in detail on the TV broadcast, Saturday evening’s show wasn’t a thriller. Now, not every race is a classic, and there are times when the leader sort of checks out and dusts the field. While I enjoy a close battle as much as the next guy, sometimes one driver just has everyone covered.

[adinserter name="GOOGLE AD"]Of course, for the longest time that was rarely the case at Texas. The 100%-throttle, wheel-to-wheel racing pre-Dallara DW12 racing, although never really my cup of tea, had an “edge of your seat" quality not on display in recent years at TMS. The question is after three consecutive somewhat less-than-thrilling shows, and with dwindling crowds, are INDYCAR and Texas a good match going forward?

To begin, let’s establish what AR1’s Tim Wohlford very eloquently outlined last week: the pre-Dallara DW12 racing isn’t coming back for a variety of reasons (thankfully). INDYCAR has made very clear that their intention to avoid pack racing post-Vegas 2011. And to the series’ credit the measures implemented have so far broken up the “pack-racing" and in turn improved safety.

In short, while Texas may once again be an exciting show, it will never be (nor should it be) the same show we saw from 1997-2011.

The better question is whether INDYCAR is pursuing the correct formula with the low downforce/tire-degradation route at Texas?

Although tire performance/wear will always be something of a give and take, and the tire-degradation has arguably been a factor in breaking up the packs of cars at Texas, recent IndyCar races at TMS have placed too great a premium on tire-wear. I equate to this to Formula One a few years ago, when drivers were essentially racing to meet a tire-performance quotient. Similar to Texas the last three years, in those races, tire-wear became the story, with racing something of a secondary concern.

Again, while there may be some skill in this (as Dixon and Ganassi displayed) to the fan in the grandstands, a tire-wear coefficient is a rather nebulous concepts. And even if they understand it, they cannot see tire wear, nor is there an adequate device by which to track it. Fans want to see drivers race – understandably.

In short, the series, TMS and Firestone (I’m not pointing the finger at anyone in particular) need to devise a formula in which the racing is the primary focus. Tire-wear like fuel-mileage, should be a secondary one.

Now, I don’t recommend the series continuing this “tires-fall-off-after-a-few-laps" deal. But if they’re going to do that, then they need to devise come with an adequate way for fans to track tire-degradation, then educate them to the nuances of this style of racing. Believe me, I’d love to know.

Honda

The trend so far in 2015 has been that unless it rains, Honda is in a bit of trouble. In fact, only Graham Rahal has scored a podium for Honda in a “non-rain" race in 2015. Saturday was nothing to brag about for the proud manufacturer either, with Marco Andretti was the lead Honda coming home fifth. Other Honda drivers such as Ryan Hunter-Reay and Rahal endured miserable evenings.

[adinserter name="GOOGLE AD"]Of course, in the lead-up to Texas there was some grumbling from the Honda camp about the aero kits. Clearly, Honda’s Wirth-designed kits have been the inferior of the Chevrolet Pratt & Miller designs. Honda teams insist their horsepower is good, but their hold up is the body kits.

Currently, the main bone of contention seems to be that the aero kits have simultaneously created a hierarchy of haves (Chevy) and have-nots (Honda) while also adding costs to the teams’ bottom lines without any appreciable return on investment. And thus far, there is no evidence the kits have improved the commercial side of the sport based on viewership or attendance. Schmidt Peterson Motorsports co-owner Sam Schmidt made this point, and even suggested returning to the spec-Dallara DW 12.

Now, let me say this is a complex matter, for which I see no clear solution. For example, if INDYCAR were to adopt Schmidt’s proposal, they might appease Honda, but they would clearly disenfranchise Chevrolet, who has a substantial investment and currently a competitive advantage in accordance with the rules as outlined. Although part of me wants to say sanctioning bodies make rules, and participants shut-up and obey them, I am also aware that intelligent people such as Schmidt, Michael Andretti and Bryan Herta are living the business realities of the matter every day.

To me, there is no apparent answer.

Granted, I’ll leave open the possibility that the series is currently going through some of the teething problems that naturally come with the introduction of a new concept, and that this could be the start of something that sparks renewed interest and passion in the innovative side of the sport. I just have yet to see any indication of that.

If there is a lesson that has come from all this it is that INDYCAR seems to have the model upside in attempting to market an engineering endeavor rather than having engineering support a strategic marketing initiative. In other words, the series would be better served its energies to marketing and commercial activities before throwing precious team and manufacturer resources at what is fundamentally an engineering endeavor? And do these economic times require that series leaders defer such engineering extravagances to a time the series is on firmer financial footing? Those, in my opinion, are more than fair questions.

For now, Mark Miles and Derrick Walker potentially have a tenuous situation on their hands that will need to be navigated carefully. Because telling people to go pound sand, really isn’t an option right now.

Driver Carousel

Without anything empirical to support the following, it’s difficult to recall a season in which there have been so many driver changes from race-to-race as 2015. Dale Coyne Racing for example has fielded 8 drivers in 9 races, and only once did they run the same driver lineup on consecutive race weekends. Conor Daly has run 4 races in three different entries: #18 for DCR at Long Beach, #43 for SPM at Indy, and #5 for SPM at Detroit. After giving way to Ryan Briscoe for Texas last weekend, Daly will be back in the 5 this weekend at Toronto, then reportedly replaced by Briscoe again for the duration of the season.

And the carousel hasn’t been simply limited to drivers, but car liveries as well. How many paint schemes has Simon Pagenaud sported? I suppose on the one hand, it is good multiple sponsors are involved but does changing paint schemes every weekend hurt a driver’s and team’s ability to build their brand?

As for the driver changes, part of it is injury as we’ve seen with James Hinchcliffe, Carlos Huertas and Rocky Moran, Jr. Part of it seems to be commercially driven as we’ve seen at Chip Ganassi Racing with a rotation of Sage Karam and Sebastian Saavedra in the #8 entry, as Saavedra will be back in the car at Toronto.

[adinserter name="GOOGLE AD"]As for the Daly-Briscoe Rota in the #5, many fans were upset when Briscoe was announced for Texas over Daly, something AR1’s Lucille Dust reported before anyone else during the Detroit weekend. Essentially, the argument went that Daly had shown himself well in Detroit (true) and deserved the opportunity to stay in the car at Texas. Also, for a sport crying out for young-talented Americans to help move the needle commercially, the cries for young Daly were understood.

However, from the perspective of Schmidt Peterson Motorsports, so was having Briscoe in the car at Texas. With a new sponsor demanding results, and possibly questioning the value of their investment with Hinchcliffe out, Briscoe, a previous winner at Texas, gave SPM a known quantity. While Daly was very good in Detroit, when it came to Texas, he was an unknown.

Also, when it comes to the rumored decision to go with Briscoe after this weekend, remember the Aussie has won at three of the tracks the series will visit after Toronto (Mid-Ohio, Milwaukee, and Sonoma).

Yes, I agree that Daly being in the car is better for the sport commercially. Also, I can’t deny seeing a promising young driver get an extended look is more intriguing than the prospect of the veteran Briscoe, who has had opportunities in top-line equipment.

But is the state of the series so diminished that teams value the possibility of one or two more top-10 finishes over developing stars for the future? Whatever the case, I find it odd that the interests of the team and that of the sport are seemingly in this case, so misaligned. And it’s hard to imagine another sport where such a scenario is so prevalent.

Brian Carroccio is a senior motorsports columnist for AutoRacing1. He can be contacted at BrianC@AutoRacing1.com