Indy 500 needs a dose of speed

May 21, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
IBJ Letters To The Editor

[In response to Bill Benner’s May 9 column] I have a disturbing thought that could be answered by the Indy Racing League in a positive way. Basically, it’s this little problem: Indy racing isn’t getting any faster.

The fastest Indy 500 was run 21 years ago. Look at the pole sitters’ times, and note how far back you’d have to go (decades) to have a pole sitter’s time not make today’s field!

Innovation is gone—illegal—with spec cars and a spec engine. Virtually all the progress that has been made in the last 20-plus years has been poured into safety, not speed. Speed sells tickets to racing events; safety is for little old ladies who drive hybrid SUVs. Worse: The added safety hasn’t made the racing any better. There’s a yellow flag every time someone drops a paper cup; it’s looking like NASCAR out there, with results almost as preordained.

What all this expensive, distracting added safety has done, however, is to have allowed less-qualified drivers to compete. That, too, means that the truly talented “hero driver” has less advantage, and that anyone who can garner the sponsorship can buy his/her way onto a team—and if there’s enough money, Mr./Ms. No-talent can often make the field (and that’s not safe, either). With everybody equal and nothing new, there’s little of interest. I love racing, but I don’t think parades are very exciting. Racing is about going ever faster.

True: The overall payoffs have gone down in relation to the expense of entry. Could it be that fewer people are interested in putting money into today’s racing because it’s not really a contest of innovative, skilled, brave souls, all trying to go faster than the next skilled soul, but just another advertising delivery system (and a complicated one, at that)? Perhaps racing isn’t differentiated enough from other forms of advertising.

Where are Mauri Rose, Rodger Ward, Jimmy Clark, Parnelli Jones, the Unsers, Mario Andretti, A.J. Foyt (the original)? Where is the driver/character that someone can identify with? Where are the heroes? Why is my driver better than your driver—and who the heck is that obscure rich kid?

Ideas? There are a bunch of them: Open up the cars, aerodynamics, engines, drive systems, fuel capacity and burn rate, but limit the number of tires each team could use, so the race is focused back on the track rather than on the pits, the rules and the speed limits. (Bobby Unser, I believe, was the last winner to run the whole race on one set of tires.)

Or open up everything except the outside dimensions of the cars and the total amount of fuel used. Or make anything legal, but set a car “claiming price” of $250,000. There are plenty more ways to allow technology to have something to do with actually going faster, which is what racing is all about.

Long live real racing!


Tim Kern


  • Innovation
    Racing is as much a business as a sport; some of the rules were meant to reduce costs for the less-well-heeled teams, but I agree it's stifled innovation. I think a reasonable approach would be to allow only normally-aspirated, stock-block, production engines of up to 312 cubic inches- there is plenty of room for innovations there, and the results would be more relevant to production vehicles. If it was simply about raw speed, all the teams would be running gas turbines.
  • Driver Skill
    I agree. Now more is based on technical areas, Not driver skill. Bring back areas were you need aggressive drivers, Lilke the Greatest, MARIO...

Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.