Well did .................

[Peter Mallett]

The US GP do anything to gain the interest of the American public? Was it the kind of show they can enjoy ar are there things which need to be done to make it more interesting?

Personally I thought it was a good advert for F1. However the track is a bit of a "freak" because of the level of visibility for the fans. The long blast leading from the final turn to the first turn is the key to the whole thing. Cars blasting flat out and slipstreaming are the stuff of US motorsport.

BTW. The reason that the cars were slower than the indy cars is probably due to the wing they have to carry for the infield and the fact that they're accelerating from a slow corner rather than continuing around a flat out blast.

[Regs]

I think they're off to a good start. I really enjoyed the race and the stands were full. I think they put on agreat show and will most certinly be well recieved. We'll know for sure next year. There definitely is an F1 following here in the US, but its a sort of subculture. Mainstream media doesn't cover it, although to its credit, my local pulp sheet did give it some mention in a small article box! Believe me, its a big deal for Newsday to do that. Now they just need to keep it in everyones face a little bit. I notice more of the F1 Racing and Autosprt magazines selling out at the newsstand so thats a good sign.

[Nuvolari]

Unfortunately, the vagaries of the 10 Tenths posting system has wiped out an hour's worth of work I did culling about ten prominent US papers for samplings of their coverage.

I can sum up by saying it was run-of-the-mill -- what you would expect: Schumi breezes to victory despite late spin in front of largest crowd (heavily favoring Ferrari) ever to see an F1 event.

The only piece of commentary I came across was in the Indianapolis Star, by writer Bill Benner. Here are excerpts:

"Is that all there is?

Is that all there is to Grand Prix racing, supposedly the most sophisticated, exotic, exciting form of motorsport on the planet?

Was this really the ultimate test of man and machine, or barely little more than a Sunday afternoon quiz?

Was the most difficult decision of the entire afternoon really when to yank the rain tires and go with the "slicks,'' as they call them?

Indeed, let's review the two biggest moments of the first U.S. Grand Prix at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway.

No. 1: the pass that put Michael Schumacher in the lead.

No. 2: the fire that eliminated his principal rival, Mika Hakkinen.

And that was it . . .

"Yet this wasn't a race. An event, yes, but a race, no. More like a parade, albeit at speeds ranging from 30 to 200 mph.

Schumacher got so far ahead he even lulled himself to sleep . . .

"You know what a lack of concentration costs you in an Indy car? A month-long stay in a hospital and a permanent limp.

Nonetheless, the Euro press corps in the media center found this all quite enticing, even to the point of cheering.

But then, we're talking about folks who get all frothy over a nil-nil soccer game between Luxembourg and the Lesser (or is it Greater?) Antilles.

Sorry, but I just don't get it, and I wonder if the Americans who wandered into Tony George's speed palace for their first sampling of Formula One will get it, too.

I wonder if they'll be as eager to dish out up to $140 for a seat to next year's F-1 extravaganza.

Perhaps they will.

And maybe Team Axis (German driver, Italian car) won't be as dominant next year.

Let's hope, because Sunday, all it made for was a nap. Next year, just in case, bring a pillow."

Not encouraging, is it?

[angst]

Well, sorry, but that just reads as "We the greatest thing ever to grace the face of this earth, yup the good ol' U.S of A will find all things European are complete ****" which I don't believe is the opinion of informed motorsports fans, nor informed people generally. It wasn't the greatest of races, it isn't CART and it isn't IRL, it's different. I thought the show was much better than I believed it would be, but perhaps they're going to need to get an American driver in there before there's any real interest.How much coverage of CART was there in Britain before Mansell went over there?

[Danielsun]

I actually watched the whole race and - result aside - I thought it was quite a good 'race.' Not since Hockenheim, with Rubihno, has there been so much passing in a modern F1 race. The amount of slipstreaming going on was quite otherworldly by recent Grand Prix standards.

Granted, there still may not have been as much place swapping as Americans - no, all race fans - would ideally like, this race was not a let down. Heck, even the Jaguars passed other cars, and that is news...

[R]

An American driver in F1 would surely boost the interest in the US, but I don't think it's the be all end all in terms of American interest. However, I think drivers that they are "familiar" with are essential. I.e. Jacques Villeneuve was very well supported by the general crowd in this race, and he is of course a former Indy 500 winner and Indycar (it wasn't yet called CART back then, was it?) champion. Juan Montoya is also an Indy 500 winner and CART champion, and from what I understand he's very popular with the CART fans. Him going to F1 will surely lure some spectators to next year's US GP to support him as well. And so the popularity will hopefully grow.

[Gerard]

Ofcourse Bill Benner's article is just one man's opinion.
He's entitled to it but I think he's crying in the desert.
Besides, his remarks about 'Team Axis (German driver, Italian car)' shows exactly what kind of guy he is.

[R]

Yes. I have to comment on that. That was a disgusting comment from Mr. Benner.

[Regs]

American sports journalists, your typical beat reporter who covers Football, Baseball and so on posotively, absolutely, will not "get it". Remember, these are the ones who constantly harp on Soccer as a waste of time as there is no action. No doubt this is something the guy got stuck with. It isn't within thier intellectual capacity to see anything from anyother point of view. For example taking one of them to an art museum, let alone a Formula 1 race, would be like taking the baby antichrist to church. The writers who will have something bright to say, and have some perspective, you'll find in Car and Driver, Road and Track, Racer, Autoweek. These are US publications that have writers who can appreciate what F1 is all about. And even if you don't agree, at least there will be something of substance to disagree with. I hate to say it though, yes, in your typical daily US rag, that is probobably what you'll find. But if you want intelligent, informed, US journalistic response, wait for the aforew mentioned pubs. to come out.

[TimD]

I'm out of touch, but...

Does Pat Bedard still write in Road and Track? It's years since I saw a copy on an English newsstand, but he was always worth reading.

[Liz]

"Team Axis"? I guess that guy is showing his age as well as his ignorance there. Think what he would have said if the podium had been TGF, TGFLB and HHF!

The article in our paper today about the three race fans from Canada who died in their RV said that they had gone to see the F1 cars race in the Indianapolis 500. I can't even imagine that.

I have heard mainly positive comments from such of my Newsletter correspondents who have checked in so far, and we will have at least three different views of this race in the next Newsletter. If you were there and would like to add your POV, please do!

[Gerard]

Tim, I'm reading Road & Track online since I can't get a copy over here, but I haven't seen anything lately from the hands of Pat Bedard.
He does however have a regular column in Car And Driver which is ofcourse from the same publishing firm.
Indeed, a writer worth reading.

[Neil C]

That Benner guy is just stroking his local readers by telling them that F1 is nothing compared to Indy 500, IRL, whatever. He DOES get it, it's just that he wants to say what he knows will be the popular opinion with his readers. I am constantly dissapointed by the lack of knowledge of motorsports by these alleged "journalists". They are more interested in turning a clever phrase than an honest description of the event.

[Valve Bounce]

Let's look at this from an analytical aspect. There were a number of unfortunate things happening right at the start of hte race that spoiled what would have been a splendid spectacle. First of all, DC jumped the start, followed by the Button-Trulli coming together, then the Mika Hakkinen engine bust, and Johnny Herbert's disastrous pit stop. This robbed us of a lot of potential scrapping for the second spot that Rubens inherited. I know it is bad luck for all of us that all this hapened, because the only thing that thrilled me afterwards was Mika Hakkinen fighting for third spot with a Minardi, and Jacques fighting for the last podium place with agent 0057. It is a shame, because this could have been a Trulli great race, right on the Button, and the only one who was excited afterwards was Murray. I am sure it will be a much better race next year.

[Peter Mallett]

Well yes Mr Bounce and no. Surely those things you mention are all part of what is F1. That's why I asked the question.

I know that the US audience likes to see passing and this it gets in plentiful supply because the ovals lend themselves to it. They also tend bring out the pace car when the gaps start to stretch. IMHO the majority of passing in a cart or indy race is lapping slower cars so if you take the view that the race was "pure" F1, was the whole event good enough to take F1 back to the US on a permanent basis?

There is still the point that all of the cars were running very close times (Including the lesser teams of Minardi and Arrows). Your point about Jaguar dicing for 6th and a possibly higher position highlights this.

[downforce]

Matt Sorum [Guns'nRoses drummer] in 1991 remarked, that they GnR were like the Indy500, people goto the Indy to watch the crashes not the sport...!!!!!

[Nuvolari]

I, too, was struck by the "Team Axis" reference. No shortage of jerks in the world, eh?

That aside, what worries me is that Benner's carping about a lack of action is reflective of what too many non-aficionados think.

We who love F1 have never been shy about blasting the FIA for robbing the sport of racing. So, if a casual viewer or a NASCAR fan tuned in, was there enough racing to make them eager to check out Suzuka?

In my view . . . no.

I believe American culture is different to the extent that action is what counts. That's why the NFL and NBA are huge. The same can be said for NASCAR.

Add to this the lack of an American in the series. Not the recipe for resounding success.

It's probably premature to judge whether the USGP will succeed. The inaugural race, especially at a venue like Indy, is sure to draw a throng.

The real barometer will be next year.

[Blackjack]

Let me start by saying I am a loyal F1 fan and have been one since 1988. I am also an American who has been living in Germany for the past 20 years.

I doubt that the average American racing fan will change his loyalties from NASCAR or CART just because we think F1 is the most technical, has the best drivers, cars and a long history. Persuading them F1 is the King of Motor Sports is the task of F1 marketing and they aren't doing a good job. Additionally, the USGP didn't help that much. IMHO it was a dull race with a few high spots -Shu-me's pass and JV's antics.

Although, I am a loyal fan, I must admit I find most F1races since 1992 dull and boring. While passing should be the norm, when it occurs - Hakineen passing Shu-me at Spa - it is turned into a happening. I think we need to accept the fact that our sport isn't everything it used to be. Whether, we like it or not, it has evolved into entertainment. I think before we start pointing out what is wrong with American motoring racing we should talk about what is wrong with F1 racing.

I also think we should truthfully answer the questions Bill Benner set out in the Indianapolis Star. The only point I saw commented on was his stupid reference to Team Axis. If one checks through the past posts one will find similar references to the ability of NASCAR drivers to speak the English language, the mental capacity of American sports fans, and in general that Americans just don't get it, nothing is better than F1 racing. So others are as guilty of stupid remarks.

I thought Benner's comments came straight to the problems that are prevalent in F1 racing. Before we can convert Americans to our sport, we have to solve these problems.

Would an American driver help? I doubt it. Americans readily accept foreign athletes - Sousa, Martinez, De Ferran - as their heros competing in -baseball, football, IRL, CART - sports. So I feel the lack of interest doesn't relate to the lack of American drivers. The problem is, F1 racing is not an American sport. I once read where F1:

Represented the very best in technical expertise directed toward motor sports.

The drivers are arguably some of the best in the world.

The manufacturers also represent some of the best automakers in the world.

While other series regularly produce better racing and a much better show, none have the pure pageantry and pre-race hype that F1 oozes.

No other series has the same history and tradition.


The average American racing fan couldn't care less. He is only interested in racing for the sake of racing and until we convince them that our sport is better they will remain loyal to their type of motor racing. The answer will come at the next USGP.

[Valve Bounce]

Peter, as I said above, too many unfortunate incidents and mishaps robbed the USGP of a great spectacle. This does happen in F1,yes, but not always to the same unfortunate degree. I thought parts were dull, but then I had to get up at 3.45 am, and then sit through an hour of Hawaii Eye in Black and white first. Maybe next year, for sure next year!!
Hey Downforce, the mindset of some people here in Oz are not much better regarding accidents. The broadcast here is introduced by a sickenning series of horrendous crashes, which are supposed to get the audience here in Australia hyped up for the show. That just goes to show the mentality of the producer here in channel 9. I normally use this as a cue to mute the sound and go make a coffee.
Now to my pet subject - to make F1 more interesting, all that needs to be done is to limit the projected frontal area of those huge rear billboards, deflectors which they call wings. That alone will restore slipstreaming right through corners and overtaking will be possible at every circuit.

[angst]

After my initial feelings of ditaste for the condescension in the article, and having thought about my own views on the state of F1 presently I agree with Blackjack that there are problems with F1 that need addressing. We all know what those problems are, and I have aired my own opinion as regards what can be done to change this on far too many occasions already on previous posts. My only thinking is, with America not being over-impressed with the racing on show, could that be the spur for the FIA and Bernie to finally realise that changes are needed? As I've said before - if we can see it, why can't they?
Money has always been the Holy Grail of Bernie's F1 empire, so if they are missing out on a potential market the size of the USA simply because the racing isn't good enough I'm hoping that maybe that'll be enough of a jolt.

[Liz]

Some excellent points were made above and I have little to add but wanted to say that any Americans who want to write Bernie and tell him this should do so. He needs to hear it from the people who are buying the tickets. Sure he doesn't read all the letters, but somebody does.

What if the second chicane at Monza had happened at the USGP? Do you think that would have made people more likely or less likely to tune in next year? As I've said before, I don't want to see crashes and I hold my breath until all the pilots are spotted up and walking around ... but what do you think?

[ireshad]

While there is a certain amount of truth in what that journalist said regarding that specific race, there was two comments made (excluding the daft Axis comment) that were particularly telling:

1. "You know what a lack of concentration costs you in an Indy car? A month-long stay in a hospital and a permanent limp."

I get the impression he thinks this is a good thing. Well I suppose its an opinion.


2. "But then, we're talking about folks who get all frothy over a nil-nil soccer game between Luxembourg and the Lesser (or is it Greater?) Antilles."

This, in my opinion, is the main difference between US and European sports fans (and athletes). The attention span, and the need for continuous action. Its most noticable at the moment in the Olympics. While the sprint races, and shorter distance races in general, are dominated by the Americans, by the time you get to the 5k, 10k and Marathons they've pretty much evaporated.

And as an aside, do the Greater Antilles have a soccer team? I'm just curious.

[Gerard]

Mister Benner talking about a Greater Antilles soccer team shows he's either ignorant or he's using a metaphor.

The Greater Antilles is not a country and thus can't have a soccer team.
It's a group of islands in the Caribbean consisting of Cuba, Hispaniola, Jamaica and Puerto Rico.

[downforce]

Hey valve , dont u get Star Sports down under???

[Jay]

I think having a competitive driver in F1 would make a HUGE difference in how the sport is percieved there.

Take football (soccer) for example. The Americans will go on and on about how boring and pointless football is when the World Cup is on, and their team is finishing in last place. Yet, when the Women's World Cup of soccer comes around the Americans all go crazy over it, because they have a competitive womens team. Women's soccer is much slower paced, and often lower scoring than mens, yet, because the Americans can do well in it, they love it.