IBJNews

Indy 500 in the books, but heat isn't a record

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Fans sought shade under the grandstands and beneath umbrellas. Misting stations got a healthy workout. But Sunday's Indianapolis 500 won't go down in the record books as the hottest in the 101-year history of the race.

The temperature in Indianapolis hit 91 degrees at the end of the race, just one degree shy of the race-day record of 92 set in 1937, according to the National Weather Service. It was also 91 on race day in 1919 and 1953.

Even so, it was plenty warm for the tens of thousands of fans who carted coolers full of ice and water into the Indianapolis Motor Speedway to see Dario Franchitti win his third 500.

"It was way hot but the breeze was really helping," said Susan Binder of Columbus, who watched the first 25 laps from her seat along the main straightaway before taking a break and heading to a tent for some infield tailgating.

Speedway officials had spent the week urging fans to stay hydrated and use sunscreen liberally after forecasters called for temperatures in the mid-90s with a heat index of 100. The track brought in portable misters and cooling fans and prepared to treat more than 1,000 fans at its medical facilities.

Late Sunday, track officials said fewer than 200 people were seen for heat problems and other issues at the infield medical center and low numbers were expected at other sites around the vast speedway.

The heat and cloudless skies sent John Genenbacher of St. Louis under the concrete and aluminum grandstands about midway through the race to get some shade. But he said this was his 39th trip to the race and that the hot day didn't discourage the group of about 40 people who attend the race together.

He said a steady breeze the kept flags flapping helped a lot.

"It doesn't seem as hot as it was a couple years ago," Genenbacher said. The race-day high hit 89 degrees in 2009.

Shelia and Russ Wilkinson of Janesville, Wis., have attended nearly every 500 since 1968. Shelia Wilkinson said she kept drinking water throughout the race but only left her seat in the sun once during the race.

She said she thought the weather had been more miserable in other years when it was more humid and lacked any breeze.

"It wasn't as bad as I thought it would be," she said. "We know the drill."

Chris and Maggie Saunders of Toledo, Ohio, spent much of the day in the shade of the grandstands' second deck along the track's main straightaway. They helped keep themselves cool by soaking handkerchiefs in ice water from their cooler and tying them around their necks.

Chris Saunders has attended about a dozen 500s, but it was Maggie's first. Despite Sunday's heat, she said, "I'll come back."

Some fans, though, opted to sit this one out.

Paula Jarrett, 52, of New Palestine, just east of Indianapolis, has attended nearly every race for the last decade, and her husband, David Hill, has been going for about 20 years. They've sat through unseasonably cold days, heat waves and even severe thunderstorms in 2004 that spawned tornadoes in the city.

"We usually never miss a race," Jarrett said. "We've been at the track before when it's 55 and rainy and you're freezing your rear off and drinking hot chocolate and wishing the sun would come out, and we've been out there and fried in the sun."

This year, though, they decided to sell their tickets high in the third turn after seeing the forecast.

Jarrett said her husband had some "seller's remorse." Still, she said sitting this one out wasn't all bad.

"There's something to be said for staying at home and listening to it on the radio," she said.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
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
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

  2. Shouldn't this be a museum

  3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

  4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

  5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.

ADVERTISEMENT