NASCAR vs. long distance track events in popularity

the difference is that in a nascar race, there are pit stops, changing track conditions, and rules in place to make sure that the most passing and tightest competition happens. This is rarely the case in any distance track race. You never have 30 runners fighting for the lead in a race. You also never have runners that have been lapped get their lap back and get a chance to fight their way back into contention.

There is a HUGE difference in how much can change over 200 laps in a nascar race (different tires, making adjustments on the car, etc) that can make a car that was totally out of the race over the first half get back in it for the second half. You never see that in running. There might be a lead pack for a while, but usually runners just fall off the pace and then someone puts in a kick to win.

Also, if NASCAR drivers just drove around the track at 50 mph for 200 laps and then drove 180 mph the last 5 laps, it wouldn't be near as interesting.

This is why I think they should make track a contact sport - to make things more exciting. Watching that Spanish runner elbow that Ethiopian runner was one of the most exciting things I've seen in track. What if you change the rules to allow elbowing pushing and shoving in the final lap? This would bring in the MMA crowd for sure and NASCAR viewers tend to like watching that sort of thing too.

One thing I hate to say is why does everyone gather at the water jump during the steeple? They are hoping for a fall. It is the same reason alot of nascar fans watch a race they want a wreck.

If you are a true nascar fan you know that there is alot more than just circling the track. Strategy is huge, two tire, adjustments to the car, fuel only stops, and alot of other things make nascar a more exciting.

NASCAR along with F1 has a lot of personalities connected to it that make what happens before and after the race just as entertaining, F1 is practically a soap opera between guys who are supposed to be their own teammates (see Lewis Hamilton and Fernando Alonso circa 2007, or Senna/Prost at McLaren). Most track athletes are boring people who say the same thing over and over after their race is done.

Jaegabombs wrote:

NASCAR along with F1 has a lot of personalities connected to it that make what happens before and after the race just as entertaining, F1 is practically a soap opera between guys who are supposed to be their own teammates (see Lewis Hamilton and Fernando Alonso circa 2007, or Senna/Prost at McLaren). Most track athletes are boring people who say the same thing over and over after their race is done.

As a racing fan, I think this is the most accurate statement. Lagat gave us a hint of what could be with the drama/firey interviews leading up the the 5k + the injury. I bet there was more than a few casual viewers/Bolt viewers who actually became interested in whether or not Lagat could pull it off.

-STS

Haji wrote:

Also, if NASCAR drivers just drove around the track at 50 mph for 200 laps and then drove 180 mph the last 5 laps, it wouldn't be near as interesting.

Classic!

It's all about the $$. People don't routinely bet big bucks on track, it doesn't require lots of money from big companies so big companies aren't going to put lots of money into promoting it, building huge stadiums, etc etc.

In order of importance:

1. Merchandise

2. Beer

3. Personalities

NASCAR fans purchase merchanise. NASCAR fans drink beer. NASCAR drivers have actual personalities and don't always come off as the Beaver.

I don't see 100,000-200,000 people in the stands at a track meet. I do see that many at NASCAR races.

It ain't about the race. It's like the Ky Derby. Make it an event and people will come. People will buy stuff. Advertisers will care. T-and-F is stuck trying to make more people care about what is actually happening on the field. If you want that have the competitors compete nude like in the original Greek Olympics. Other than that, offer lots of beer and entertainment away from the track. Sports Marketing 101.

Alan

Well, there are lots of reasons...many already mentioned. Here's another. Stand at the fence when 43 cars go by at 200 mph. Then go stand at the fence when 15 runners go by at 15 mph. I've done both, and it is no comparison which is more thrilling from a spectator/sports fan perspective.

this seems to be the perennial debate on letsrun about how you can make T&F more appealing to more people, but I will ask the obvious question that never gets asked:

"Why would we want to make T&F more popular?"

It's a legitimate question because as much as I want to see people interested and concerned about racing if they aren’t it doesn't seem to hurt the sport so long as we have a relatively committed group of hard core fans/athletes to keep it going.

From a marketing point of view, the days of monolithic sports are fast fading. By this I mean that as the communications revolution expands into extremely personalized entertainment options the likehood of one event, beyond the Olympics or the world cup, being a international success become extremely low. Now we have entire channels devoted to the coverage of one sport and on the internet we have websites devoted to one sport, like letsrun, the effect is a balkanization of our culture where people get interested in a sport or activity and sort of tune out everything else. However, this works well for track because now we do not have to rely on CBS ABC TSN etc. to give a darn about x-c or track because online feeds give us all the coverage we could ask for. There is nothing inherently bad about that.

Again, I understand people being jacked about track but the need to make track into something as big as NASCAR seems odd and presupposes that this will be a good thing, its premise is couched in the idea that bigger is better I am not sure that this is the case. I mean look at the popularity of MMA... its advertisements with a bit of blood involved, we could do the same with track but that would mean sacrificing some of the purity of the sport and making it more of a gimmick. I am not sure that this is what we want.

Beer.

Call it NASRUN

former hurdler wrote:

I fail to understand why watching cars go in circles for 200 laps in considered interesting, while watching people go in circles for 12 and a half laps is considered boring.

There's always the possibility of a crash during those 200 laps, but that doesn't seem significant enough to explain the difference in popularity.

well kid, then you FAIL. at some point you have to accept the fact that, while some people like distance running, more people like race cars. as a spectacle, you can't compare the sound and fury of 43 race cars to a handful of skinny guys racing 10k. my humble opinion is that they are both awesome in their own way, but waaaay more people can relate to race cars than distance running.

my advice is to learn to love both then you won't be so frustrated.

besides, you could start the same thread about running vs. about 50 other sports, plus countless stupid movies, tv shows, pop musicians, etc. and tyhe argument's the same. i can't believe those things are all more important inour culture, than bekela, tegencamp, anna willard and the rest, but- GO FIGURE- they are.