Backseat Blonde - Parity isn't a Panacea

August 23, 2004

Parity isn’t a Panacea
By Allison Wagda

Parity has been the buzzword in the halls of NASCAR for
the past several months. The idea? Level the playing
field among all the teams and better racing will result.

Last week, NASCAR announced several new rule
changes for 2005 intended to remove the advantages
some teams may have gained from creative
engineering. A new gear rule will be implemented to limit the RPM capabilities of
engines, effectively slowing cars. The spoiler height will also be lowered by another
full inch, both moves NASCAR claims will “increase competition.”

I’m all for improved passability and handling in race cars. And fiddling with the
dynamics of race cars has long been the domain of NASCAR’s corporate team. To
some extent, it’s necessary as teams use ingenuity to “bend” the rules.

Yet, the change that will affect modern racing the most is still to come. Next year,
NASCAR will begin a phase-in introduction of the so-called “car of the future.” The
bulkier, less aerodynamic car will further slow the field and reportedly create more
parity among race teams.

However, equality does not equal a more exciting sport. Lost in the idea of parity is
one of the fundamental reasons why fans watch racing: the drivers. We love having
heroes to cheer every week, and we need the underdogs for whom we root.

Some drivers will always be better than others. A few, like Dale Earnhardt Jr., have
racing in their blood. Even fewer, like Jeff Gordon and Tony Stewart, have racing in
their soul.

But these drivers are not islands. Much of what produces a winning driver can be
attributed to the efforts of those behind the scenes. Take Ryan Newman for example.
Last year, he won a season-high eight races, using ingenuity and perhaps a bit of
creative engineering by his engine shop to help him cruise to victory while other cars
ran out of gas. This season, thanks to several changes from NASCAR, fuel mileage
has been largely taken out of the equation, and so has Ryan Newman (arguably still
one of the best drivers in NASCAR today).

Ever since NASCAR stopped using actual stock cars and went to a standard body
type, teams have been forced to find speed and handling under the hood. It seems
almost every year, one team or another innovates something new to gain an
advantage over the rest of the field. Stifling that innovation could result in a set
formula for every track known and used by all. To me, there’s no fun in that.

If week after week no one is allowed to dominate, can anyone truly be called a star?
The title of champion may already be handed over to an undeserving driver under the
new Chase format. Will NASCAR’s stars of tomorrow be determined by publicity and
goofy commercials?

The other risk associated with creating equally performing cars is manufacturer
sponsorships. If cars are designed to all run the same, what benefit does Ford or
Chevy gain from a victory? It would be symbolic at best. If I were a marketing
executive at Dodge, would I want to spend millions of my ad budget to support a
sport that no longer recognizes my contributions? Especially if the only difference
between my car and the Chevy running behind me is a logo on the hood? We’re
almost there today, so perhaps it no longer matters.

Equality is all well and good when it comes to opportunity. What race teams make of
that opportunity should not be restricted to enhance the entertainment value of the
sport. True competition is about being the best, not getting lucky.

© Copyright 2004 BackseatBlonde.com. All Rights Reserved, Any copying, redistribution or
retransmission of any of the contents of this service without the express written consent of
BackseatBlonde.com is expressly prohibited.