Missing it at Vegas
So I was wrong about Vegas being a boring race. So, too, was Dustin, though the larger point about the debate over track changes still stands.
(Writing a story about a dull race and having it finish with a last-corner pass is like noticing a no hitter. As soon as you tell a pitcher he's tossing a no-no, he's guaranteed to give up a warning-track double the next inning. Or something.)
And it was an exciting race, at least at the end. More after the jump. ...
We didn't have room for these charts in Sunday's paper, so here you go. (I added the 2006 listing today.):
VEGAS
Year/Margin of victory
1998/1.065 seconds
1999/1.074
2000/Under caution
2001/1.477
2002/1.163
2003/9.104
2004/3.426
2005/1.661
2006/0.045
HOMESTEAD
Year/Margin of victory
1999/5.289 seconds
2000/4.561
2001/1.420
2002/2.070
- banking added -
2003/1.749
2004/0.342
2005/0.017
One second at Vegas is, what, 5-10 car lengths? And nine seconds? Heck, you could stroll across the track between the first- and second-place cars.
I'd like to think that better banking will make for a better race. Atlanta (where all 3 series go this week) has 24 degrees in the corner, and the cars fly around that track.
But we'll see, right?
So what's the deal with Round 2 of the Stewart vs. Busch feud? I was at the office dealing with NCAA tourney stuff (you think those brackets type themselves?!), so, yeah, I missed it live. I might watch it tonight, but I have a date with a tape of Clint Bowyer's one-race sponsor.
Due to recent automated spamming attacks on our blogs, we are temporarily requiring commenters to authenticate themselves via TypeKey® before posting comments to any News & Record blog in order to prevent denials of service. We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience.