2014 NASCAR Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jahgee
  • 9,025 comments
  • 347,120 views
Sorry boys, but the 11 o 18 is going to win Martinsville. Of course this is all speculative opinion but it could be a fact so I hope nobody picks apart my post to much. Actually, don't really care. Peace!<3

No need to apologize. :cheers:
 
This picture makes me extremely proud to be a black NASCAR and general motorsports fan. What a beautiful moment in NASCAR. I must also admit, even though I can't stand Toyota, or KBM/JGR I am a huge Bubba Wallace fan and think that this guy is truly the future just as much as Kyle Larson is, and hopefully, JGR/KBM can give him a Nationwide and later a cup ride .

Welcome to the club, bud.

So now it's...
Kahne v. Vickers
Logano v. Hamlin
Patrick v. Truex Jr.

Any I missed?

Meh, Logano and Hamlin were just fighting for position. Truex Jr just had something stuck up his ass, Because wrecking someone who just bumped you out of the way makes no sense. Vickers and Kahne was the only real vs of the day.

Stanley Tools, now no longer available at Target.

But available at your local Dollar General stores in 2015 ;)
 
Ha! I totally knew this would be the finish. My brother and I were talking about how the race was going to end with 30 to go, I then said that Jr would finish 1st, Gordon second, then wreck happens, and whaddaya know, that's how they finished. I don't think I've ever been this happy to see Gordon wind up 2nd. That said, if this race winds up losing Gordon the championship; I'll be the first to say it was worth it. Besides, I think he'll do fine at phoenix and texas
 
So good to see Tony having a good run and finishing 4th. Was hoping to see him win it after the last restart.

Great runs by Ragan and Allmendinger as well.
 
Saw first 50, then had places to be. From what I heard on the radio, cautions were everywhere, but great job by Dale Jr. No doubt this'll go to the Hendrick plane crash victims.
 
Glad Junior won and didn't give some of the people here what they wanted, try harder next time Gordon. And what does it matter Gordon is leading the chase anyways. Though the chase as it stands still proves how much of a joke the new format is.

EDIT:

Well that is unless Gordon wins then it's somewhat redeeming. However, if Newman wins (though he is the driver one of my personal good friends follows) then it will be a travesty.

second EDIT:

*SHH* Don't tell anyone but I like travesty endings if you get my point


***writer clearly wants to see Newman win or Kenseth...
 
Last edited:
Ryan Newman 3rd. If he seriously somehow pulls it off and wins the championship without a race win, I... don't even know what I'd do. Probably eat a bag of Shockers in one go.

That would be a nice compensation for 2003 though. You know, when so many things went wrong for the 8-time winner that he definitely had no shot at the title at any point.
 
Glad Junior won and didn't give some of the people here what they wanted, try harder next time Gordon. And what does it matter Gordon is leading the chase anyways. Though the chase as it stands still proves how much of a joke the new format is.
This. As much as a Jeff Gordon fan I am, I'd rather see him earn a win than having it handed to him.
 
I laugh at everyone who threw a fit at Jr. winning since Gordon didn't lock himself into the final round because of it. Well, since Rick Hendrick himself said that he wanted them to race it out themselves (he has no team orders except don't wreck teammates), that pretty much negates all of the "Dale Jr. should have let Gordon win" comments.
 
That would also violate NASCAR's 100% rule.

This "rule" is broken every race. How often do you see a lead change early on where the leader drops down and lets 2nd around him in a matter of "you're faster, go ahead." Technically that's breaking the 100% rule.

Remember yesterday when drivers were playing games on pit road by letting others pass so they could restart on the inside? Breaking the 100% rule.

Drivers laying back at Talladega? 100% rule.

etc.
 
Well golly gee. Jr. should have pulled over and let the 24 win.

Didn't say anything about what Jr should or should not have done but okay. I'm merely saying NASCAR doesn't properly enforce their own rules (surprising, I know).
 
The 100% rule is almost unenforceable unless your crew chief gets on the radio and asks you if your arm is itching. Leaving a pit in one less position you would have been in to better your start position is strategic and may very well fit in to the verbage of the 100% rule

"NASCAR requires its competitors to race at 100 percent of their ability with the goal of achieving their best possible finishing position in an event"
 
"NASCAR requires its competitors to race at 100 percent of their ability with the goal of achieving their best possible finishing position in an event"

Followed by...

"Any competitor who takes action with the intent to artificially alter the finishing positions of the event or encourages, persuades or induces others to artificially alter the finishing position of the event shall be subject to a penalty from NASCAR."

"Artificially altered shall be defined as actions by any competitor that show or suggest that the competitor did not race at 100 percent of their ability for the purpose of changing finishing positions in the event at NASCAR's sole discretion."

According to the above definition, intentionally sandbagging on pit road to alter your and at least one additional driver's positions would be breaking the 100% rule.

But I can see this discussion is going nowhere fast, so I'll end it here.
 
NASCAR doesn't enforce it unless the violations are blatantly obvious. Even then, the rule doesn't get enforced much.
 
"NASCAR requires its competitors to race at 100 percent of their ability with the goal of achieving their best possible finishing position in an event"

Followed by...

"Any competitor who takes action with the intent to artificially alter the finishing positions of the event or encourages, persuades or induces others to artificially alter the finishing position of the event shall be subject to a penalty from NASCAR."

"Artificially altered shall be defined as actions by any competitor that show or suggest that the competitor did not race at 100 percent of their ability for the purpose of changing finishing positions in the event at NASCAR's sole discretion."

According to the above definition, intentionally sandbagging on pit road to alter your and at least one additional driver's positions would be breaking the 100% rule.

In the context of the part I've bolded, I would suggest that deliberately dropping a position when leaving pit lane in order to restart on the inside would still count as 'racing at 100 percent of their ability'. It doesn't matter what you do during the race, so long as you try your best to finish as high as you can. Restarting on the inside at Martinsville could gain you 2 or 3 places, so dropping 1 in order to gain 2 would, in the context of enhancing your finishing position, be racing at 100% etc.
 
Roo
In the context of the part I've bolded, I would suggest that deliberately dropping a position when leaving pit lane in order to restart on the inside would still count as 'racing at 100 percent of their ability'. It doesn't matter what you do during the race, so long as you try your best to finish as high as you can. Restarting on the inside at Martinsville could gain you 2 or 3 places, so dropping 1 in order to gain 2 would, in the context of enhancing your finishing position, be racing at 100% etc.

That's what I was thinking by having a better winning strategy. Getting hung up on the outside in Martinsville could cost you a lot of positions. The rule is pretty unenforceable. It was a knee jerk reaction to the Bowyer deal so people felt better about it. It's extremely hard to prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt unless someone admits to it or there was radio chatter with clear intentions. Bottom line is there is no possible way a race car driver would let someone else win. If there is, they have no business on the track.
 
Roo
It doesn't matter what you do during the race, so long as you try your best to finish as high as you can.

So when Jr intentionally looped it at Bristol, 2004 with a flat tire (causing a caution, of course), he was using 100% of his ability to get the best finish possible. You're saying that was okay?
 
It's not right but the implementation of the rule was all centered around not intentionally causing a caution or further, not altering the outcome of a race via illegal actions.
 
So when Jr intentionally looped it at Bristol, 2004 with a flat tire (causing a caution, of course), he was using 100% of his ability to get the best finish possible. You're saying that was okay?

Hmmm. I should have put more thought in to that, especially as I don't have as much knowledge of NASCAR history as the regulars in this thread do. Please consider that statement retracted.

I do, however, think there's a clear difference between dropping a position exiting Martinsville's pit lane to claim the inside line at the restart and deliberately spinning either your car or anyone else's in order to bring out a caution, in that one doesn't cause a danger to anyone whilst the other very much does.

In the end, of course, the rule is in place to stop ridiculousness like this happening, and nothing more.

 
It's not right but the implementation of the rule was all centered around not intentionally causing a caution.

Then NASCAR should've emphasized that specifically.

My point still stands that the rule is an unorganized, vague mess. If they don't want intentional cautions to manipulate the outcome of a race, then just say it. State specifically what is and is not breaking the 100% rule. Otherwise teams will start exploiting loopholes like Martinsville pit road.

And that's an easy fix. Make a minimum speed on pit road under caution. If you drop below that minimum average in one of the timing zones, you get a penalty. With this the only reason you'd be under it is if you have a major issue and then penalty doesn't matter anyway. You get in, make your pit stop, get out. No games.

Or a slightly more extreme alternative: go back to single-file restarts exclusively for Martinsville (and maybe Bristol but that's not the topic at hand).

Roo
I do, however, think there's a clear difference between dropping a position exiting Martinsville's pit lane to claim the inside line at the restart and deliberately spinning either your car or anyone else's in order to bring out a caution, in that one doesn't cause a danger to anyone whilst the other very much does.


I'd somewhat disagree here. With people slamming the brakes on pit exit trying to time their position right, it's only a matter of time before someone behind them doesn't get the message and pile drives them right in the back.
 
Remember the 2013 Richmond Fall race? That was a textbook example of the 100 percent rule.
 
Then NASCAR should've emphasized that specifically.

My point still stands that the rule is an unorganized, vague mess. If they don't want intentional cautions to manipulate the outcome of a race, then just say it. State specifically what is and is not breaking the 100% rule. Otherwise teams will start exploiting loopholes like Martinsville pit road.

And that's an easy fix. Make a minimum speed on pit road under caution. If you drop below that minimum average in one of the timing zones, you get a penalty. With this the only reason you'd be under it is if you have a major issue and then penalty doesn't matter anyway. You get in, make your pit stop, get out. No games.

Or a slightly more extreme alternative: go back to single-file restarts exclusively for Martinsville (and maybe Bristol but that's not the topic at hand).

I fully agree about the rule. The rule is not very specific and was a knee jerk reaction rule to make people feel better about it. NASCAR realized they had to address the issue it in a short time. Hence the rule. It's darn near impossible to enforce as has been discussed. Jr pulling over for Gordon would be a violation of the rule per what the rule vaguely states. Also would be extremely difficult to prove. The single file start would be ideal. I don't agree about the minimum speed on pit road. The limit is set. Do not exceed it. No biggie going under it. One could also argue that the minimum speed itself is hard to gauge with a car with no speedometer. The braking thing could also be hard to prove. Driver "accidently" hit the brake. Very far fetched and extremely obvious intentions. Rule isn't that clear.
 
lol


B1DtG5nCEAE4HnN.jpg


https://twitter.com/MillerLite/status/527181860074717185
 
Back