Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 05/2006
My Photo

« Notes From the 2013 IndyCar Race at Barber | Main | IndyCar TV Ratings Relatively Flat for Barber at 0.18 »

April 09, 2013


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Ted Wolfram

IndyCar TV numbers are so is hard to see how it can last much longer.

Would you spend any serious money on a sponsorship for 300,000+- TV viewers? I wouldn't!


I've always been a defender of the length of Nascar races, particuarly with the depth of competition in the Cup series. It is an endurance race for the driver and pit crew as well. The length allows teams to overcome a poor starting position or a pit road mistake. And often that extra 20% of race length is absolutely needed for those teams. But it also exposes drivers that can lay down a great qualifying lap, but lack the ability to consistently manage a 500 mile race. And that's something that I value in racing.

Would it be nice if it fit in a smaller TV window? Sure, but to me it is not worth changing the nature of the racing.

Tammy Kaehler

OK, I *loved* the super-clever Les Miserables reference. Actually laughed out loud reading it. So here's your love for it.

Also, thanks in general for your wrap-ups on every race. I rely on them when I can't catch the races (hey, I was at a book signing event, so I can't complain).

Kudos to the pdog.


Despite my negative opinion of Indycar these days Pressdog I love your overall coverage and your colorfull comments as they get me laughing. Thanks for all this and about the ratings, I guess to be expected and being up even a little from last yr for Indycar--well--least it isn't lower. Far as nascar ratings go many on other forums aren't happy as the race was fairly boring at first as they often are until later past halfway when it starts getting interesting. Also the fact there is a push by many fans who want short tracks like Martinsville etc shortened as its way to long to hold interest until it gets exciting. Also the fact that JJ didn't have much competition for the win some are complaining about and maybe affected the ratings not being higher given Danica's good race as well, although still good for Nascar. Last yr they had ratings down over 20% at some races and down 25% at the last race at Homestead last yr. Course JJ was basically out of the championship by then and Brad K was a lock for the win so not much for fans to cheer about or watch? Thanks again for your colorfull & interesting comments and info.

Ron Ford

Regarding your question "Why can't IndyCar make stars?": If you are hoping for a "star" on the level of the Danica phenomenon, that train has left the station. Rumor has it that she will be added to Mount Rushmore.

For the second week in a row, Sato and the Foyt team had water bottle issues during the race. Seriously?! Other than the time Kesolowski threw his water bottle on the track to create a yellow, when was the last time a racing team had a water bottle issue?


IndyCar, IMO, would have a better audience if they went to more tracks where they could pass. Street courses are usually the most boring parades ever.

The camera direction doesn't help either. It tends to be a hyperactive disjointed mess like NASCAR's broadcasts (SPEED's truck coverage being the exception). Let us ride onboard for a full lap with a car that's catching the one in front of it. How hard would that be? How about following the cars for a lap or two from the air? It's just too much of the quick cuts from camera to camera. Most of the races in IndyCar and NASCAR are unwatchable because of that.

As for the drivers, they all give Jeff Gordon style boring interviews for the most part. It's nice to have a Hinchcliffe or a Clint Bowyer to give some colour.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Get the Indy Inside Scoop!

pressdog® Merchandise


  • Get notified by e-mail when
    the blog is updated.


    Your e-mail address won't be shared/sold/rented/loaned etc.