FLASHBACK TO 2009: Nas"karma": A History Of Racing Rivalries And Vigilante Justice

"What goes around comes back around, and sometimes smacks the wall."

These words were penned several years back by a very dear friend of mine who passed away soon afterward, well before his time to go. And I can only imagine what our post-race conversation would have been like had he lived to see his humorously-intentioned quote come to a frightening full-circle fruition during the final laps of the 2010 Kobalt Tools 500 when driver Carl Edwards executed a near-deadly form of vigilante justice against longtime nemesis Brad Keselowski in response to an early-race crash that sent him to the garage for just shy of 200 laps.

By now just about everyone--whether or not they are fans of Nascar--has either seen exhaustive news coverage or online video of the accident in question, or otherwise been subjected to major speculation on the part of both the sport's loyal fan following and the mass media, in regards to who should ultimately receive blame for what happened, to what degree at all that Nascar shoudl have dealt with the situation, and even to the question of whether or not Nascar, relative to their recent "Have at it!" philosophy, is in part to blame for the extreme to which an angry and frustrated Edwards chose to issue a near-deadly dose of "get even."

Your writer stops here to state for the record that yes, I am an Edwards fan and have been so since his phenomenal 2005 rookie season, which coincided simultaneously with my longtime favorite, Rusty Wallace, racing his "Rusty's Last Call" farewell tour--and alongside of that, my subsequent search for a new driver unto whom I would pledge my support as a fan. Allow me also to state for the record that my "shared" Nascar loyalties (thanks to 16 years of supporting Rusty) also include Roger Penske's organization for which Brad Keselowski is presently under contract. From the sole perspective of a "Nascar fan," I admit to having a somewhat skewed opinion on the issue, naturally jumping to the defense of Mr. Edwards, but as a writer with many years of journalism training under my belt, I fully and completely understand the importance of examining the history of the "paybacks" with the utmost of journalistic objectivity.

That point having been duly clarified, I move on.

RACING AND RIVALRIES: THERE'S MORE TO THE STORY
In order to fully understand the events that took place between Edwards and Keselowski in Atlanta, it is important to examine them relative to the history of racing rivalries in general. And in doing so, it must be clearly understood that such rivalries, pure and simple, have been part and parcel to the sport of auto racing ever since its inception. And furthermore, it is in large portion the "rivalry"--the "bad blood," if you will--between Driver X and Driver Y, that drives (pun intended here) fans of all ages and organizational loyalties to glue themselves to their television sets or to their paid seats at the respective tracks for the duration of three-to-four hours' time, watching with unmatched excitement as their favorites "go at it" for four-, five-, or in one instance, six-hundred miles of hard-charging, heart-stopping quest for that coveted checkered flag and ultimately, a series championship title.

In all reality, what would the sport of auto racing be without its share of "bad boys?" And who "hasn't" seen the classic video of the post-Daytona 500 fistfight incident between Cale Yarborough, brothers Donnie and Bobby Allison and their respective team members? For that matter, can anyone even recall which driver actually "won" the race in question? (Just an "aside" for any new, "modern era" Nascar fans--it was Richard Petty.)

Let's face it--fussin', fightin' and feudin', while not exactly a "gentleman's" means of settling a score with a fellow driver, are nonetheless always present and accounted for in greatness of degree, whether in the form of public displays on the race track, behind the scenes in the garage area or in the most extreme cases, "the hauler," or Nascar's version of "the principal's office." And while we the loyal fans of the sport have a natural tendency to elevate the drivers to the highest of pedestals while picturing all of Nascar as "one big happy family," the reality is that in more instances than we would care to openly acknowledge, nothing could be farther from the truth--and in a few select cases, the "teammate camaraderie" that is so readily played out in front of the cameras, is practically non-existent behind the scenes.

Consider the following examples:

KURT BUSCH vs JIMMY SPENCER
Flashing back to the late summer of 2003, a case of "pit road retaliation" between Jimmy Spencer and Kurt Busch culminated with Jimmy jumping out of his car and punching Kurt in the face, resulting in a one-race suspension for Spencer, in addition to his doing "jail time" on an assault charge. Ironically, it was Busch, the victim, who was subsequently subjected to jeers and boos form Spencer's supporters during the night race at Bristol on the Saturday immediately following the incident in question. As a personal aside, your writer was present at said race and vividly recalls the number of fans bearing "Free Jimmy!" protest signs, in addition to the loud choruses of further protest when Kurt ended up winning the race, which ultimately led me to wonder--"Excuse me, but just which driver was the assault victim in the first place???"

GREG BIFFLE vs KEVIN HARVICK
This one is a modern-era classic which saw its inception several years ago within the ranks of what was then the Nascar Busch Series. A bump here, a tap there, a few spinouts and a couple of very visible "in your face" confrontations--and suffice it to say that these two boys are not the most likely candidates to sit together peacefully at a Thanksgiving dinner. And while Harvick has become known for his aggressiveness with a number of other drivers--among them the late Bobby Hamilton Sr., truck series driver Coy Gibbs (a confrontation subsequently netting him a one-race suspension), and most recently a name-calling incident involving Carl Edwards (which resulted in the much-publicized "choke-hold" leveled by an angry Edwards in the garage area of Charlotte Motor Speedway), it is by far his repeated scuffles with Biffle which have earned the most notoriety.

TODD BODINE vs--WELL, YOU NAME THE DRIVER
To put a new twist on an old phrase, for an extended time period in modern-day Nascar racing, it frequently appeared that "where there was a wreck, there was a Bodine"--more specifically, "Baby Brother" Todd, Instead of attempting to name all the drivers who have suffered disappointing finishes at his hand, it would be much simpler to compile a list of those who were fortunate enough "not" to be included on his weekly "hit list." Perhaps most notable among those with a score to settle with Todd woudl be his former teammate, Jimmy Spencer, who managed during their joint tenure to endure more than his share of on-track scuffs and scrapes courtesy of the youngest Bodine.

BODINE vs BODINE--OR, "FAMILY FEUD: NASCAR STYLE"And now, for Bodine brothers Geoffrey and Brett, and the much over-publicized revelations which surfaced during the running of the inaugural Brickyard 400. In this particular instance, middle brother Brett unintentionally sent older brother Geoffrey into a spin, then went on to score his best-ever Cup series finish: a second-place. In the post-crash interview that followed, the elder brother would then openly reveal a history of family issues between the two of them, followed by the not-to-be-forgotten quote:"He's my brother and I love him, but he spun me out." In the end, it would appear that these shocking revelations, not the fact that Indiana's own Jeffrey Michael Gordon earned the distinction of "victor" in the historic inaugural, would become the single outstanding focus of what should have rightfully been Gordon's moment of glory.

RUSTY WALLACE vs JEFF GORDON
Die-hard Nascar fans can tag this one a true Bristol Motor Speedway tradition, as more than a few times these two gentlemen tangled in a last-lap dance to the finish. each time with Mr. Gordon edging out Roger Penske's well-seasoned veteran to take the checkered flag, leaving the Gordon camp celebrating and the Wallace entourage fuming in disgust and displeasure. And while Rusty continued to maintain a more-than-professional public demeanor regarding each "incident" ("Rubbin' is racin'", one could only be left to speculate regarding the 1989 Cup champion's honest thoughts on the issue.

RUSTY WALLACE vs RYAN NEWMAN
A classic example of "trouble in Nascar paradise," personal issues between Rusty Wallace and former teammate Ryan Newman surfaced following the running of the October 2004 event at Martinsville Speedway, a track where Wallace had earned himself quite a reputation for emerging as "the victor." And the issues which emerged front-and-center following their very visible on-track altercation were not exactly to be settled in a gentlemanly manner. In Rusty's final stage appearance at the 2005 awards banquet, his farewell speech attempt to praise Ryan as a teammate included the admission that he may have "roughed him up a little bit," and was met by a bored, almost sleepy look from Newman when the camera panned its way to his seat in the audience. Proof in the pudding that the mere act of "working together" does not necessarily make the best of friends out of two drivers with opposing personalities.

And as a further example of the same, consider--

CARL EDWARDS vs MATT KENSETH
What fan of modern-day Nascar has "not" seen the footage of a poised-for-a-fight Carl Edwards approaching his Roush-Fenway teammate Matt Kenseth while the latter was being interviewed live, following the October 2007 Martinsville event? Thus surfaced revelations similar to the aforementioned from the Penske camp, that "all was not well" in the Jack Roush garage. And while for all intents and purposes the two rivers are presently projecting the image of "civil teammates," the serious Nascar fan still tends to wonder if indeed all is now well behind the scenes.

TYING IT ALL TOGETHER
So what is the point, you might ask, in consideration of the relevance of these past and present feuds and altercations with consideration to Nascar's newest philosophy of allowing the drivers to "police themselves?" And furthermore, does "past history" justify incidents such as the Edwards-Keselowski confrontations and the potentially life-threatening consequences of the same?

In essence, while "responsibility and sensibility" should, in your writer's humble opinion, ultimately rule the game when all is said and done, the sport's loyal fans have long been "crying out" for more excitement during the races. Both track attendance and broadcast viewership have suffered due to the "boredom factor," and when Nascar subsequently responded by announcing the freedom for drivers to "police themselves," incidents such as the Edwards-Keselowski tangles, while not "acceptable" in some fan circles, were nonetheless to be expected. Stated bluntly: the fans wanted more excitement, Nascar responded, and in the first instance of a driver saying "enough is enough," a great majority of the very same fans were crying foul and crucifying Mr. Edwards. Which leads one to ask, what is it that the fans "really" want to see? And from whence should come the dividing point where Nascar must ultimately step in and put an end to the very confrontations which the fans find "thrilling?" And at what point is a driver such as Edwards finally allowed to say, "It's time to take care of this issue!"? And had Keselowski's car not gone airborne, would there even be a discussion of the event in question?

The answers to the above questions are likely to be the subject of debate within the sport's various and sundry fan circles for some time to come, but one thing is certain: whatever one's personal definition of "excitement" in racing--whether it be the thrill of the speed, the risks and the rewards, or simply the personal satisfaction of supporting a certain driver or organization of choice come what may--the sport is here to stay.

So jump in, sit down, shut up, start your engines, and enjoy one hell of a ride.

DEDICATED TO THE LOVING MEMORY OF MY SCHOOLMATE, FRIEND AND NASCAR BUDDY, KEVIN RICHARD ROWLEY, WHO COINED THE OPENING SAYING. I MISS YOU KEV!

Nascar And Tradition: Maintaining The Familiar In The Face Of Changing Times

Longstanding traditions have been part and parcel of the American way of life for as long as all of us can remember, and certain customs within the realm of professional sports are no exception.

Consider, for instance, what professional baseball would be without the ceremonial first pitch or seventh inning stretch, or a resounding chorus of "Take Me Out To The Ballgame" spontaneously ringing throughout the stadium. Consider further, what professional football season would be without the annual "Thanksgiving Classic" or the extravagant Super Bowl halftime production, or what the absence of "March Madness" would mean to the world of college basketball. And just how much excitement and enjoyment would hockey season be without its share of broken teeth, bloody noses and bruised egos that are just as much a part of the quest for the coveted Stanley Cup as are the games themselves?

In one word: boring.

In essence, tradition is just as much a part of any sport as is the competition itself. It provides both fans and participants with a sense of consistency and continuity--a comfort zone, if you will--that keeps the loyalists coming back for more, in eager anticipation of those "little things" that they have al come to expect and embrace over the passage of time.

Nascar racing is certainly no exception to the rule when it comes to many of those endeared customs that have placed a signature stamp upon the sport over the 60-plus years since its inception. What follows is a look (in no particular order of importance) at a mere sampling of the traditions that have served over the sport's history to shape, mold and define it into what it has become--arguably the most popular spectator sport in the United States today.

SPEEDWEEKS AND THE DAYTONA 500

While other professional sports have always adhered to the practice of reserving "crowning glory" for their respective season finales, Nascar by longstanding tradition practices the exact opposite. Each February, the teams end their three-month off-season sabbatical by heading to the very birthplace of their sport--Daytona Beach, Florida--for their season-kickoff spectacular known as "Speedweeks." This grand opening event is actually a series of "several" events taking place over an 11-day time span and culminating in what has come to be known as "The Great American Race" or "The Super Bowl Of Nascar," the Daytona 500. Customarily, he who triumphs in this most prestigious event is known not as the Daytona 500 "winner" but rather as the race "champion," and furthermore his winning car is subsequently "confiscated" by Nascar for the honor of being placed on public display at "Daytona USA" for the period of one year, until a subsequent "champion" is duly crowned. Also worthy of mention is the fact that to this day, the Daytona 500 is the only race on the circuit whose title is not preceded by the name of a corporate sponsor, leaving it to stand alone in the place of honor to which it alone is rightfully due.

THE CHECKERED FLAG
Although its actual origin is unclear, it is most likely believed that the tradition of waving the checkered flag in recognition of a driver's victory began in the early days of racing dirt tracks, where women placed in charge of drivers' lunch breaks would signal them to stop by waving a checkered table cloth. Another widely accepted theory of origin states that the flag was first used to signal the end of bicycle races in 19th century France. The earliest actual photograph of a checkered flag's use at the end of a race is traced to New York during the inaugural Vanderbilt Cup race. Though the date of said race is uncertain, the best estimate of such time is somewhere between 1906 and 1908. (SOURCE: CheckeredFlag.com)

"SIGNATURE" VICTORY CELEBRATIONS

Modern-day post-race celebrations have long since moved well beyond the customary "victory lap" to allow the individual drivers to "seal" their hard-fought triumphs with pieces of their own respective personalities, thus making each celebration truly "one's own." Among those "personal touches" that fans have come to recognize and love over the years are the backward ("Polish") victory lap, credited to the late Alan Kulwicki for the purpose of ending each race "facing and thanking the fans"; the "fence climb" (Tony Stewart); the "snow angel" (Kurt Busch, in response to his Bristol victory the day after a massive snowfall pounded the track); the backflip (Carl Edwards); Kyle Busch's "victory bow"; and "the kissing of the bricks," initiated by Dale Jarrett's crew following DJ's 1996 triumph in the Brickyard 400 at Indianapolis.

However, there is perhaps no victory tradition more popular amogst both drivers and fans than the celebratory "burnout." Although its origin within the realm of Nascar is debatable, the practice actually took root in the CART series, where in 1997 driver Alex Zanardi "lost [self] control" after emerging from last place and a lap down to win the Cleveland Grand Prix, without the benefit of a caution flag. The story is told that he was so excited that instead of heading to Victory Lane, he drove his car directly "to the front straightaway, put his foot on the brakes, turned the wheel and pushed the gas pedal to the floor" (David Newton, ESPN.com). Credit for the first actual burnout on the Nascar circuit has been attributed to several drivers, among them Dale Earnhardt Sr. (the 1998 Daytona 500); Ron Hornaday Jr. (Nascar Craftsman/now Camping World Truck Series); Mike Skinner (Suzuka , Japan--1998); and Kevin Harvick (Atlanta 2001, two races following the death of Dale Earnhardt Sr.). But irrespective of its actual beginnings on the Nascar circuit, the burnout remains the most widely recognized and beloved celebration of victory within present-day Nascar.

Whomever the driver, whatever the race, there is no doubt that the fans love watching the drivers place their own marks of individuality upon their moments of glory, and there is no doubt in your writer's mind that as time passes and new victors emerge from the shadows, the list of beloved victory celebrations will increase both in number and the creativity factor.

DARLINGTON: THE LADY IN BLACK, "TOO TOUGH TO TAME"

Without a doubt, Darlington Raceway, the first of Nascar's "super speedway" tracks (by original classification), is also among its most beloved, despite its dubious distinction as the track "too tough to tame." As your writer has been known to state (botched grammar and all) with each visit that the drivers make to this historic track, "The Lady In Black ain't nobody's lady!" This 1.366 mile raceway, by today's measurements re-classified as an intermediate track, is perhaps most widely revered as both the birthplace of the "Southern 500" and for its trademark battle scar appropriately known as the "Darlington Stripe." It has been stated in the past on numerous occasions that a driver has not "properly" raced Darlington until he has been the unwilling recipient of his own "stripe," and further, as an outward "honor" to "The Lady," the retaining walls remain, for the most part, untouched by paint, leaving the bold "black" in place on said wall as a silent reminder that this particular track is "one tough old broad" and he who remains standing in conquest when all is said and done is truly worthy of the respect of his competitors and an entire nation of fans.

TALLADEGA SUPERSPEEDWAY AND "THE BIG ONE"

With each visit to Talladega Superspeedway, it is never a question of "WILL" there be a major wreck, but rather one of "When?", "Who will trigger the highly-anticipated 'disaster'?, and "How many cars will be involved?" Over your writer's 20-plus years as a Nascar fan, I have been witness to more than "anyone's" share, fair or unfair, of such "horror stories" at the 2.66 mile facility--two "spectacles in particular involving my drivers of personal choice: Rusty Wallace in the spring of 1993 and Carl Edwards in the spring of 2009. But despite the dangers traditionally associated with the speedway (attributed, realistically speaking, to the practice of "restrictor plate racing" due to the size and configuration of the track), Talladega's two yearly events continue to draw in some of the largest crowds of the season, a significant testament to its place of honor in the hearts of race fans everywhere.

BACK-TO-BACK EXCITEMENT AT CHARLOTTE MOTOR SPEEDWAY
For those race fans seeking "that little added extra" in terms of the excitement factor, the last two weeks in the month of May are guaranteed to provide just that, as the teams head to Charlotte, North Carolina for two highly anticipated weeks of thrills, chills and spills. The first event on the calendar is Nascar's All-Star Challenge, a non-points, "show me the money" event where almost anything goes. Although subjected to certain tweaks and changes each year, the basics surrounding the "all for fun, all for the money" event are the same: the eligible participants consist of winning drivers from the present and previous seasons, past Cup series champions, two drivers who "race" their way in during a mini-opener event and one driver who, on the basis of fan popularity voting, is "elected" into the field. The race is run under the lights in multiple segments, and though a "victor" is recognized for each segment, the actual winner of the overall event is not determined until the checkered flag falls at the end of the "final" segment.

By tradition, the Coca-Cola 600, in terms of distance the longest event of the Nascar season, takes place in Charlotte over the Memorial Day weekend. The 600 is unique to Nascar in terms of distance, and until 2010's addition of 75 miles to the spring race at Phoenix, this race also held the distinction of being Nascar's only "daylight-into-nighttime" event. Also noteworthy regarding the 600: it takes place on the same date as the prestigious Indianapolis 500, and over a period of several years in Nascar's recent history, a few drivers attempted what has become known as the 1,100 mile "Double Dip,"an attempt to run both the Indianapolis and Charlotte events in whole or in part, over the course of a single day. Two drivers noteworthy in that respect are Tony Stewart and John Andretti.

THE ALL-STAR PIT CREW PRE-RACE SPECTACULAR

While all of the pre-race attention during the regular "points races" is focused on driver introductions, there is one night a year set aside for the pit crew members to bask in "their" respective moments in the spotlight: the All-Star Challenge pre-race festivities. With a touch of nighttime glimmer, glitz and pageantry near-equal to a Hollywood-fashioned extravaganza, each participating driver's crew excitedly emerges onto a stage-setting and subsequently rushes into the crowd amidst an exuberant display of hand-slapping, high-fiving displays of unity and team spirit, all in rhythm to a background of upbeat, celebratory music. To say the least, this traditional team-and-crowd motivator is hailed by the fans as "near-equal" to the racing itself in terms of the excitement factor.

TRIUMPHS AND TROPHIES

It goes without saying that any and every race victory is unique and special in its own respect. However, there are a few select facilities where the "special" is accompanied by the "sweet," in the form of certain coveted trophies unique to those specific tracks. Notable among such are Martinsville Speedway's special-crafted grandfather clocks; Nashville Speedway's signature Gibson guitars (specially handcrafted by Sam Bass, before the track held its final event last season); "Miles," Dover International Speedway's concrete "Monster;" the Memphis "Statue Of Elvis"; and arguably the most unusual and outrageous of them all: Texas Motor Speedway's 12-gauge Beretta shotgun--and it's for real, folks! Such displays of originality leave your writer wondering just what someone else's brand of creative genius is going to craft next and for which race track. May I personally suggest a mini-statuette of a battle-scarred race car. fully upright and mimicking the ultimate gymnastic "headstand," to be gifted twice yearly to Talladega's "Survival Of The Fittest"?

All jokes aside, no one can deny the important place that certain traditions occupy within the sports (plural) that all of us enjoy watching during any given season of the year. While "change is good" in terms of flowing with the times, your writer holds fast to the belief that the familiar is so much better in terms of providing a stable sense of where things now stand relative to their humble (or not-so-humble) beginnings--a lesson in history worthy of passing down to later generations of fans in order that they, too, may learn to appreciate those time-honored elements that well-seasoned fans will continue to hold dear for generations to come.

Winning Isn't Everything, It's The "Only" Thing--Or Not???

NOTE: I brought this piece out of hiding for the benefit of some of my Nascar friends on Facebook. It was written before Jimmie won "#5."

An old familiar adage states "To the victor belongs the spoils." But in the case of modern day Nascar, the saying could be paraphrased to state that "too many wins spoil the victor." And there is probably no single driver on the scene more aware of this bitter truth than four-time Sprint Cup series champion Jimmie Johnson.

Johnson, whose accomplishments within the sport of auto racing stand alone in a class all to themselves, has amassed to date a total of 49 career victories, a single checkered flag shy of joining the elite group of drivers claiming 50 or more trips to victory lane over the course of their careers--and he is not finished yet. Add into this mix his precedent-setting four consecutive series titles, and the sum of the equation in the eyes of the sport's millions of fans is simply this: predictability and boredom.

Enough already.

While no one will readily argue that fans of Nascar or any other sport simply love to back a proven winner, there comes a point in time when one has to stop and ask the question, "is winning 'really' the only crowning achievement, or is there something more?" And from a driver's perspective, a catch-22 quickly emerges into the picture. If he indeed truly possesses the necessary talent, experience and determination to succeed irrespective of any and all obstacles that may stand in his way, what then should be his ultimate goal? Succeeding at what he does best, or simply appeasing the fans who repeatedly express (arguably) justifiable disdain at the fact that he appears virtually unstoppable in his continued quest to remain at the top of his game? In essence, what is truly most important--a successful career, or popularity among the fans? And just what, if any, is the "mysterious secret" behind Jimmie's unbridled success?

Past and present speculations have pointed to the most obvious possibility: plain and simple, old-fashioned "cheating." After all, it is no secret that Johnson's crew chief, Chad Knaus (nicknamed "Cheatin' Chad" in various and sundry circles), has been busted and even suspended countless times after post-race inspections have pointed to something "sinister." But if suspected cheating on the part of the crew chief were solely responsible, then how does one explain the team's going on to post a Daytona 500 victory with an interim chief at the helm, during the course of a six-week suspension once issued by Nascar to Mr. Knaus? Pure luck? Mere coincidence? Or is it just that Johnson is "that good?"

And while Driver 48 may simply be the one currently occupying the "hot seat" amongst bored and displeased fans, bear in mind that Johnson is not the only one who has found himself, at one point or another, the recipient of a non-harmonious chorus of jeers and boos with each and every trip to Victory Lane. There appears to be a consistent trend within the sport, whereby fans naturally tend to express seasonal "hatred" (if you will pardon the harsh term) for virtually "any" driver who exhibits a clear-cut dominance of his game within the course of any given season. Take as the ultimate example, Richard Petty's unsurpassed season consisting of 27 victories--those occurring well before the sport's sanctioning body expanded its year to consist of 36 events. Your writer can only imagine at this point that even Mr. Petty's most loyal fan following found itself bored after watching "The King" make those victory laps week in and week out. Does anyone even recall from that era, which "other" drivers actually won a single race during Petty's "banner" year as a driver and champion? When all the attention is focused on a single driver or organization, then is it really so unreasonable to wonder just "what is left" for the fans to get excited about and actually glue them to their seats each week for the course of three to four hours of a single broadcast?

Not convinced? Need a further examples of modern-day fan displeasure? For starters: Driver 18, Kyle Busch, and in the same breath (your writer pauses here to shudder at her own thoughts), Driver 99, Carl Edwards. Looking back upon the 2008 season, Busch (who scored eight victories) and Edwards (whose celebratory "victory backflips" totaled nine and placed him in the runner-up position for the championship--which by the way, ultimately went to, uhm, Jimmie Johnson) managed over the course of a single season to amass a combined total of 17 checkered flags, a mere fraction shy of equaling "half" the number of scheduled events for the entire duration of the season. Exciting for their respective fan followings, yes, but for those supporting the remaining drivers on the circuit, simply a great big, loud yawn and a chorus of "here we go again." And consider further, the vintage years of Rusty Wallace's dominance in terms of victories. Once more, your writer shudders to admit, Wallace's predictability in terms of number of wins within a single season didn't accomplish a great deal in terms of boosting his popularity. In fact, when Rusty's "impressive" victories were added to an equally "unimpressive" total of blown engines and other miscellaneous DNF's, Driver 2 subsequently earned the nickname "Mr. Inconsistency" amongst a few broadcasters and commentators within Nascar's inner circle.

So now emerges the ultimate and eternal question: what should be a driver's truly most important career achievement? Victories and titles which either showcase his talent or make the fan masses speculate regarding sinister secrets to his success, or simply going out there and driving the car, doing his best and letting the checkers fall where they may--all the while projecting a squeaky-clean Mr. Nice Guy image simply to gain and maintain a consistent, large fan following?

Perhaps someday a driver will emerge from the shadows and strike that seemingly impossible perfect balance. But in the meantime, as long as certain organizations continue to dominate, the fans will in turn continue to speculate on what secrets may lie hidden behind the scenes.

It's all part and parcel of the onward and upward progress of the sport--and like it, love it or hate it, rest assured that "the cycle shall continue."

Nascar Under The Influence: The "High Price" Of "High Times"

NOTE: In response to the recent suspensions of certain team members found in violation of Nascar's substance abuse policy, and the outcries of displeasure from fans and others who feel that such behavior casts a black eye on the sport, I am publishing a "reprisal" of a piece I wrote in 2010 in response to Nascar's adoption of the policy currently in place. All information contained herein was correct as of the original writing, and no attempt is made to defame or dishonor the personal character of any individuals named.



********************

Nascar has made its position on the issue of substance abuse within its ranks abundantly clear: enough is enough--you play, you pay, and they aren't backing down. And the adoption of their widely publicized substance abuse policy (effective beginning with the 2009 season) served to unmistakably cement their side of the issue into the annals of the sport's history. But while the official implementation of said policy may have been recent, the problems necessitating such are nothing new.

In fact, far from it.

While the most widely publicized and media-scrutinized violation was that involving Sprint Cup owner/driver Jeremy Mayfield (early 2009 for alleged use of methamphetamines), Mayfield's case merely served through the amount of coverage extended by the mass media, as the sport's first "real" wakeup call relative to the issue of drug abuse within Nascar's rank and file. Your writer’s research has uncovered numerous instances across the board of each of its three major racing series, dating as far back as 2002 to driver Sammy Potashnick of both the Nationwide (then Busch) and Camping World (then Craftsman) Truck Series; to Truck Series driver Brian Rose in 2003, to multiple suspensions for Nationwide drivers Shane Hmiel (now banned for life) and Kevin Grubb (deceased in 2009), the 2007 suspension and subsequent reinstatement of Truck Series driver Tyler Walker and the 2007 incident involving Truck Series driver Aaron Fike (who tested positive for use of heroin on race day.) Among the more current listings of those found to be “in violation” are crew members Matthew Huffstetler, William Keith, William Hileman, Kenneth Luna and William Wheeler, with probably the most shocking individual to test positive being J.C. France, grandson of Nascar founder Bill France, Sr.
And these occurrences serve only to scratch the surface of an issue that goes much deeper--leading one to ponder the most obvious questions:

What took them so long? And why, in the wake of the increasing number of drug busts within the sport's rank and file, are drivers and team members alike continuing to ignore the warnings that the sport's governing body means business--and in so doing, place both their own and their organizations' reputations and credibility on the line? And delving even further, what does Nascar specifically consider "over the line" in terms of substance abuse, what drugs meet the criteria for mandatory testing, and what responsibilities fall personally upon the shoulders of the drivers, team members and other personnel respective to compliance with a policy considered “too broad” or “otherwise intrusive” by a vast majority of the sport’s “inner circle”?

NASCAR AND DRUG TESTING: THE “WHO, WHAT AND WHY”
It isn’t solely the drivers who fall under the watchful umbrella of Nascar’s new drug testing policy. Quite to the contrary, it extends “across the board” to encompass the entire crew, including “over-the-wall” members, crew chiefs, car chiefs, tire, fuel and pit crew members, spotters and race-day support personnel consisting of engineers, engine tuners, shock specialists, chassis specialists and tire specialists. Specific substance lists and categories exist for these persons, including seven classes of amphetamines, three classes of ephedrines, ten specific benzodiazepines and barbiturates, marijuana, cocaine, zolopidem, chromates and any substance proven to increase “specific gravity.” No such list, it should be noted, was adopted for the drivers themselves at the time of the policy’s implementation. (SOURCE: JAYSKI’S SILLY SEASON SITE)

In specific regard to the drivers, the policy specifies that all competitors are asked to take a drug test should there be “reasonable suspicion” of use and/or abuse, and further, that any person obtaining a Nascar license of any sort is required to sign an authorization for testing and release waiver each season. Once suspicion of drug use has been sufficiently established, Nascar reserves the right to request samples of urine, blood, saliva, hair or breath in order to confirm or deny said suspicions. The right is also reserved to suspend competitors based upon driving/operating a passenger vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drugs, and further, competitors and officials are prohibited from consuming alcohol prior to or during the course of a race. If an individual fails a drug test, he still has the right to resume racing provided that he is willing to submit to “spot testing” as requested by Nascar and paid for at his own expense. Once an individual is reinstated, the right to randomly retest that individual is left in the hands of Nascar. And while no specific rehabilitation programs are recommended or otherwise endorsed by the sport’s governing body, self-help and participation in voluntary treatment programs are strongly encouraged for individuals determined to have a serious problem. (SOURCE: JAYSKI’S SILLY SEASON SITE)

"SETTING THE EXAMPLE"
In the most widely publicized and longest drawn-out case (last season’s alleged use of methamphetamines by owner/driver Jeremy Mayfield, about which the driver continues to maintain his innocence), the argument was that no specific list of substances existed for the drivers in the same manner as one was clearly spelled out for the crews and other team members, and further, Mayfield continually insisted that his positive result was due to a combination of doctor-prescribed Adderall and over-the-counter Claritin, despite several documentations to the contrary, including three positive tests for methamphetamines in his system. It should be noted at this point that only “after” Mayfield’s suspension did Nascar compile a list of banned substances applicable to the drivers. However, in response to arguments to that effect by Mayfield and his attorneys, Nascar spokesman Ramsey Poston stated the following: “The policy remains the same. The misuse or abuse of any drug is a violation. That remains today. That’s still the policy. What we sent to the teams was a sample of what those substances are.” (SOURCE: ESPN, 1-22-10) 
 
Within a week of Mr. Poston’s remarks, Nascar made the addition of an extensive and “non-exhaustive” list of banned substances into its official rule book, to include specific stimulants, narcotic analgesics, ephedrine, benzodiazepines, barbiturates, performance enhancing drugs such as steroids, muscle relaxers, sleep aids, beta blockers, alcohol, certain dietary supplements and any specific agents known to “mask” the presence of the above substances for the purpose of “cheating” a test. And one further note of interest: there are a number of Nascar officials and other personnel specifically trained to take, seal and further analyze any and all test samples submitted by a driver or other team member, and “whistle-blowing” among fellow competitors has also been encouraged in order to help the sport enforce and further police the policy as deemed necessary. (SOURCE: JAYSKI’S SILLY SEASON SITE)

So--Nascar’s governing body has clearly spoken and the lines of battle have therein been drawn, leaving one to wonder in the aftermath of it all, just why the list of those found in violation appears to be on the rise rather than the decline. In this regard, one is left only to speculate, but it is the opinion of your writer that it is at such a point that the issues of personal choice and invasion of privacy come into play. What, some may wonder, is wrong with a driver who, on his own time away from all things racing, wishes to innocently enjoy “a few beers with the guys?” Or in an instance such as that of truck series driver Ron Hornaday, who suffers from Graves Disease and legitimately requires physician-subscribed steroids as a means of controlling the devastating effects of his condition, was Nascar right to “exempt” him from any penalties and/or sanctions relative to the circumstances surrounding his medical need? What about certain drugs, both over-the-counter and prescription, which carry with them the potential to produce a false-positive for a “banned” substance--such being the background for the numerous lawsuits and arguments for reinstatement in the “signature case” involving Jeremy Mayfield? And viewing Mayfield’s case from another perspective, was Nascar too quick to assume guilt and therefore use his circumstances to “send a message“ to the entire field, considering that his situation was the first real “test” of their newly-adopted policy?

While no clear answers are readily evident for the continued ignorance of certain individuals with regard to compliance with the policy and the recognition of the potential dangers of “driving under the influence,” and while Nascar may find it necessary from time to time to step back and take a fresh look at their policy, potentially redefining its specifics and clarifying the ambiguities, your writer is of the opinion that the mere “adoption” of such is nonetheless a step in the right direction, placing Nascar on the same or at least a comparable playing field with that of other professional sports. And it is my further opinion that the “privacy” line ceases to exist, if not fully and completely, at least at “some point,” when an individual or group of individuals is thrust into the public eye and thus placed on a pedestal by fans and foes alike.

In short, fair or unfair, it’s called taking responsibility for one’s personal choices, and it’s all part and parcel of the price of fame.

Nascar 2013: The Year Of The Golden Hammer?

If there's any truth to the age-old cheater's proverb that says "It's only illegal if you get caught," the 2013 Nascar field certainly appears to be testing that premise to its very outer limits. And Nascar, in response, is sending out a stern message of its own: They're mad as hell, and they're not going to take it anymore. And if the severity of recent penalties assessed against some of the sport's highest-profile teams is any indication of things yet to come, cheaters beware: 

Your days are numbered, you "will" be caught, and you "will" pay the price.

The hammer has thusly fallen. And in its aftermath, we, the sport's loyal fans, suddenly find ourselves wondering what has taken Nascar so long to exercise the very degree of authority with which they have all along been entrusted, but which has either been altogether missing or, at the very least, highly inconsistent. And we are further left to wonder why, relative to Nascar's sudden and rather blatant display of power, so many teams nonetheless continue in their daring pursuits to "beat the system."

Just call it "pushing the envelope." Following the adage that "if you ain't cheatin', you ain't tryin'," or in the words of five-time championship crew chief Chad Knaus (well known for at least ten major rule violations and three lengthy suspensions): "It's our job to cheat. It's Nascar's job to catch us," and "It would be frustrating to give up trying to make our car better," one is left to wonder just how much farther the teams will be allowed to go before the sport and its governing body ultimately lose total credibility.

To Nascar's credit, they certainly appear to be trying to rectify the situation, but the attempt is long overdue in the eyes of the sport's loyal fan following. After all, much ado has been made in recent past over the blatant absence on their part, of the very quality by which they ultimately award championships: consistency. And furthermore, fan allegations of demonstrations of clear-cut favoritism toward the sport's more popular personalities or its more affluent team owners have given a huge black eye to the trustworthiness of those in positions of authority. And yet by the same token, many teams continue to boldly test the system in hopes that their manipulations, however bold or slight in nature, will somehow escape the watchful eyes of inspectors and officials alike. And while not exactly humorous at the time of commission, a look back at some of the biggest cheating scandals in the sport will certainly yield a few modern day laughs when weighed against the infractions of the sport's present field of drivers. Consider the following: 

1. Smokey Yunick, the mechanic known in his day for taking the sport's already complicated rule book a bit "too literally." Yunick, arguably one of the most gifted mechanical engineers of his day, lived by the philosophy that "it isn't cheating if the rules don't say that it can't be done." Case in point: he once passed inspection with a fuel "tank" that conformed to all the required specifications, while manipulating the size of the fuel "line" to hold more gas, and further cheating the gas allowance by secretly placing an inflated basketball in the tank, and deflating it once Nascar cleared the tank's capacity during inspection.

2. Tim Flock found himself disqualified from a 1952 Nascar Modified event when it was discovered that his roll bars were made of painted wood. Further examples of blatant weight manipulations include drivers sneaking items made of lead or other heavy metal into the cars; for instance, Darrell Waltrip once filled his frame rolls with bb's that would spill out of a trap door when the car entered the backstretch during the race; and Rusty Wallace was once issued a hefty fine when an inspection determined that his roof flaps consisted of titanium.

3. Michael Waltrip marred Toyota's Nascar debut when his inspection uncovered a fuel additive similar to rocket fuel, resulting in massive fines and disqualification from the season opener. Mikey's response? "If you don't cheat, you look like an idiot." Really, Mikey? And what does it look like when you "do" cheat?

With respect to these "classic" episodes of cheating, alongside the modern era violations currently under investigation by Nascar or under subsequent appeal on the part of the teams involved, one is left to question whether there is a single ounce of integrity remaining in the sport, and why teams continue to test the waters when it has become unquestioningly clear that little or nothing escapes the all-seeing eyes of Nascar's inspection process. The answer? We may never know, but one thing is for certain: Nascar's appeals process is presently being put to the test like never before, and subsequent rulings now stand to set future precedents for identical or similar situations brought before the sport's sanctioning body. Will these decisions open the door for positive changes beneficial to the racing that we know and love, or will they serve to further alienate an already dwindling fan population, fed up with the alleged inconsistency and favoritism that have come to plague the modern era of the sport in ways never before imagined?

Only time will tell. In the meantime, Nascar, the ball is in your court. Play it wisely. Millions are watching.

Finding Unity In The Midst Of Tragedy: A Sport (And A Nation) Carry On

As the Nascar Sprint Cup Series drivers prepare to tackle 400 miles of racing terrain at Kansas Speedway this weekend, everyone's thoughts, prayers and hearts lie much farther away from the featured race track of the week. For a few moments frozen in time, the single most important issue at hand is not "who's cheatin' who," who sits on top of the points board, who received suspensions for violations founded or unfounded, or what penalties should or shouldn't have been handed down by the sanctioning body of the sport. The "driver feud of the week" will suddenly find itself taking a backseat to the unity of a nation, as together we mourn a senseless act of terrorism directed toward our people, and the unforgivable resulting loss of human lives.

We saw it happen in 2001 when the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center and a portion of the Pentagon building were hit without warning, and prior to that when the Oklahoma City bombing and resulting deaths stunned the nation. And yet in none of these instances did the United States of America allow itself to bow to terrorists, nor will we ever. For it is in the midst of those very moments intended for our weakness, that our greatest strengths instead emerge from the ashes and send a message, loud and clear, to those who dare take unfounded aim at our freedoms:

We will not back down!

Though our hearts grieve for those in Boston whose lives were lost in the Marathon bombing, though we are shocked and stunned that our personal safety and liberties have once again come under fire, and though we continue to seek out the answers as to "WHY?", one thing remains certain: the American people will not turn our backs and readily forgive those who wish to destroy everything that this nation was founded upon and continues to stand for! We have proven so, many times in the past, and will continue to demonstrate the same unity and fighting spirit in the days ahead, without respect to those who continually--and mistakenly--believe it is "their job" to intimidate us through such desperate and despicable acts as those of the past week.

Indeed, while we may be tempted when faced with the unthinkable, to "halt" the very things in life which we have come to enjoy (including but not limited to our favorite sporting events), it is in the midst of those very times that we instead find our most tremendous strength in the simple act of "carrying on" with life as usual, and in doing so, returning some semblance of normalcy to the otherwise unfortunate circumstances intended to threaten or intimidate us. And it is in such spirit that the Nascar teams and drivers venture to Kansas Speedway this weekend--many of them paying tribute to the lives lost and to the emerging heroes on their respective race cars--echoing the common sentiment of every proud American citizen who stands in support of a "wounded" but not "broken" people:

Today, we are all "Bostonians."

Sponsorship: The Money, The Message Or Does It Really Matter?

Throughout each and every event of any given racing season, they are out there: those familiar logos with which every Nascar fan in existence has grown accustomed to seeing--the names of those products, services, organizations and "worthy causes of the week" without which, in essence, the sport as we have come to know and love it simply could not exist.

Sponsors.

They make their presence known at various levels, from the stickers plastered in mandatory locations on the side panels of the cars, to the slightly larger lettering on the rear panels, to the strategically-placed messages viewable from the in-car cameras, to the primary logos visible from the hoods and door panels, and even to the paid "naming rights" for certain tracks, the races themselves and the sport's major series. In short, the characterization of racing as a "200 mph billboard on wheels" (give or take, depending on the length of the individual races) could certainly be considered a rather accurate portrayal, one in which sponsors pay big bucks for the privilege of putting their names out there; where in return, those "big bucks" translate into the teams' and drivers' paychecks; and following those final laps, one in which the drivers very graciously and professionally return those endorsements to the sponsors by means of all those carefully orchestrated "thank-you-laced" interviews.

Let's face it: for as much as we, the fans, love the sport and lend our undying loyalties to our drivers and teams of personal choice, to what extent do we "really" pay attention to the messages behind the respective sponsorships? Has their presence, along with their generous corporate contributions, become so routine as to be taken for granted as mere part and parcel of the overall picture, or do people really take their generosity that deeply to heart? I am speaking, more specifically, of the underlying controversy behind the National Rifle Association's sponsorship of this weekend's Sprint Cup Series race at Texas Motor Speedway.

From the moment that this particular sponsorship was announced, opinions were divided based on the national attention aimed toward the gun control debate--an issue that has waged for ages but also one which, in the wake of the recent Sandy Hook Elementary School tragedy, has assumed an entirely new meaning. Which leaves one to wonder what is really important in the grand scheme of things: the money to fund a single Nascar event in the state of Texas, when it is no secret that our nation's economy--and relative to said economic crisis, the overall economy of the sport--has been struggling for quite some time, or the underlying "message" of protecting our right to bear arms under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Or does it "really" matter in the end, when all is said and done, the checkers drop, the winner is declared and everyone goes home? How much "weight" at that particular point, does the name, logo or issue "truly" carry?

Consider this, relative to the question at hand: In spite of past controversy stemming from the issues of underage drinking and smoking, or the well-known and proven harmful effects of such habits on "kids" and "responsible adults" alike, were the longtime signature sponsorships from Winston cigarettes and Busch beer subjected to similar disdain? I dare say not, considering the fact that many of the sport's well-seasoned faithfuls "still" catch themselves, to this very day, referring to the Sprint Cup series as "Winston Cup" or to the Nationwide series as the "Busch" series. And in spite of these primary sponsors' withdrawals from Nascar, it is pretty safe to say that in the same sense that smokers continue to smoke and drinkers continue to drink, those who stand on one side or the other of the gun control debate are just as likely to hold steadfast to their personal opinions, irrespective of one particular organization's sponsorship--a "paid" sponsorship, in a very expensive endeavor, mind you--of a single event on the Nascar calendar.

In the final analysis, all that the fans really need to concern themselves with is the survival of their favorite sport during trying times. Don't agree with a "message?" That's fine, because life is all about making choices for ourselves, and in the end, the only thing that should really matter is the true, pure and simple enjoyment of the sport that unites all of us under one common umbrella:

We are "Nascar fans."

Nascar's Baddest Of The Bad: Who They Are, And Why Fans Love Them

Whether we want to admit it or not, there's something mysteriously appealing about a "bad boy."  The allure has grabbed our attention since the days that James Dean introduced us to the image of the cigarette-smoking, leather-clad rebel boy with the slick hair, sexy eyes and irresistably magnetic smile.  The boy that every girl's mama warned them to stay away from, yet the boy whom none of us could resist.  The one who introduced us to the realm of the forbidden, the one whose irresistable nature quickly captured our hearts, the one whom we secretly dreamed would sweep us off our feet and carry us away, yet who represented at the same time, the complete polar opposite of every value that we were taught since childhood to hold sacred.  The baddest of the bad.  We encounter them in every walk of life.  Nowhere is immune to their presence, least of all the world of professional sports, and specifically in this instance, NASCAR racing.

A bump here, a tap there; a spin here, a flip there; a punch here, a shove there; a tossed helmet here, the eyes of an official "there;" a subsequent "invitation" to the "hauler," and there we have it:

This is how rivalries are born.  And make no mistake about it: the fans love it.

The concept of "feudalism" within racing is nothing new. Fans were introduced to the birth of the "bad boys" as early as the first televised broadcast of the Daytona 500, when more eyes were focused on the Yarborough/Allison Brothers fistfight at the checkers than they were on the race victor, Richard Petty.  And the tradition has not diminished itself with the passing of time.

Who can forget the inaugural running of the Brickyard 400 at Indianapolis Motor Speedway, and the now-famous words of Geoffrey Bodine after he fell victim to a "love tap" from younger brother Brett?  "He's my brother and I love him, but he spun me out."  Those of us who watched the event as it unfolded "may" recall that while Geoffrey was spun out of contention by his own flesh and blood, "Brother Brett" went on to finish "runner-up" to race winner Jeff Gordon.  I state again, "may" recall, because whether we want to acknowledge the fact or not, Geoffrey's revelations of a "Bodine family feud" behind the scenes ultimately stole the spotlight, when all the attention should duly have been focused on the race victor who claimed Pittsboro Indiana as home.

And speaking of Jeff Gordon: this four-time Cup Series champion has himself been labeled one of the modern-era's "bad boys" by those who have witnessed his many infamous "bump and run" victories at the expense of several of NASCAR's notables, perhaps the most memorable being his last-lap Bristol tangles with nine-time BMS winner Rusty Wallace, eliciting cheers of exuberance from the Gordon entourage and simultaneously, "beer cans and boos" from the many Wallace loyalists.  Yet when all was said and done, it was Rusty who ultimately laid the issue to rest with the now famous words "Rubbin' is racin'."  And once again, whether we care to acknowledge or deny the fact, the fans love "rubbin' and racin' " and couldn't agree more.  Just ask the longtime loyal supporters of the late, great "Intimidator," Dale Earnhardt, Sr.

Without a doubt, no one was better at executing the "bump and run" than "The Man In Black."  And he proved that fact again and again at the expense of many of his notable competitors, perhaps the most memorable of them being Darrell Waltrip, Rusty Wallace and Terry Labonte.  No doubt the Bristol image of Terry crossing the finish line and taking the checkers sideways, courtesy of "Driver 3," will remain forever ingrained in the minds of everyone who witnessed the race in question: the very same race which found many other of his fellow drivers victims of the "Wrath Of Earnhardt" in the course of a single night, and the very same event where his first "victim," Rusty Wallace, reportedly returned the favor by pelting the "Senior Earnhardt" (in reality, one of his closest friends) in the head with a water bottle in the garage area at the end of a very long night.  The Earnhardt fans cheered, the Wallace fans jeered, the Labonte fans gasped in happy disbelief...and the "bad boys" of their day chalked up another unforgettable race.

Fast-forward: In addition to the aforementioned "classics," the more modern era of racing has introduced its own share of noteworthy personalities that the fans "love to hate," among them Kevin Harvick, about whom the late Bobby Hamilton once stated, "Just because he's driving Dale Earnhardt's car, he thinks he 'is' Dale Earnhardt," and to whom fans once found themselves witness to a longstanding feud with driver Greg Biffle; two-time champion Tony Stewart whose reported "physical encounters" with reporters, photographers and even fans have left him with more negative publicity than his three championships have given him positive exposure; and one of NASCAR Sprint Cup's "latest and greatest," Kyle "Rowdy" Busch and Carl "Flipper" Edwards.  And speaking of "The Flipper," how about the "Talladega Classic" from a couple seasons back, showcasing Carl's last-lap flight into the fence, courtesy of Brad Keselowski (who went on to win the race) or the equally-famous teammate scuffle between Carl and fellow Roush-Fenway driver Matt Kenseth?  And how many of us hardliners also recall 2004's behind the scenes "Battle Of The Teammates," Penske Racing's (now retired) Rusty Wallace and his in-house nemesis Ryan Newman? The combination of scuffles and words between those two most certainly made Rusty's "Last Call" farewell tour in the season to follow, one to be remembered for more than a former champion's well-earned "goodbye."

Yes indeed, the battles are many, whether on or off the track, and while the surrounding publicity more often encompasses the negative rather than the positive, the bottom line is simple: without a little something "extra" to keep the fans glued to their seats, the sport would quickly become stale and boring.  Let's face it: racing was meant to be aggressive, designed to thrill and excite its audiences everywhere with the "edge of the seats" anticipation of "what's next?"  If the myth of "43 best friends playing nice on a Sunday afternoon" were truly allowed to perpetuate itself, where in all reality would the "excitement" ultimately lie?

Personally, this writer would much rather find herself defending those drivers I have grown to love since my introduction to the sport in 1989, against their harshest of critics both in the media and among my closest personal friends, than to sit in front of the television set for 36 weekends a year, watching courteous gentlemen drive in neat little circles for 4-, 5- or 600 mile durations and subsequently celebrate in Victory Lane with milk (exception, Indy 500 of course...it's their tradition!), Oreo cookies and a toast to the driver who allowed them to pass for the win because the driver's manual and their mamas told them it was "the nice thing to do."  Ultimately, who could really call that sort of thing "racing?"  Certainly not me!

NASCAR's "bad boys," in essence, provide the sport with the level of excitement that it needs in order to keep its fans tuned in, glued and ultimately "addicted."  They are here to stay, and this writer and longtime fan couldn't be any happier.

Married To Nascar: A Salute To The Women Who "Made The Grade"

Admit it if you dare, ladies.  At least once, we've all dreamed of being the one who shares the spotlight with a favorite Nascar driver: from the Victory Lane kiss at the end of a hard-driven 500 miles, to the reserved seating in Las Vegas as a given season's accomplishments are rewarded (doubly so if that accomplishment happens to be a series championship), to the enjoyment of the reverence, respect and even the envy of the millions of other women who would all but sell their souls for a mere single day of walking in your shoes.  To grasp for and ultimately attain our spot in Nascar's elite "inner circle" would be nothing less than the culmination of a dream-come-true for many of us who sleep, eat, breathe and live our lives fueled by that "need for speed" that only the most charismatic of drivers could ultimately satisfy. 

 

It is a status that many desire, a select few obtain, and that a silent minority all too quickly discover that in all reality, the glamour and glitz of being "Mrs. Nascar" are better left to fantasy.

 

In other words, the Nascar wife is a lady of a truly rare and special caliber.

 

She is the one who learns all too quickly that "for better, for worse" can manifest itself as "the worst" at the mere turn of a corner; the one who never knows if the "kiss for luck" before her husband climbs into his car is in actuality "a kiss goodbye;" the one who posesses an amazing ability to step back and smile when an entourage of female admirers throngs her husband in search of an autograph (oftentimes on "body parts"), knowing that ultimately "she" is the one that he will be taking home; the one who must also share the "love of her life" with team owners, sponsors, crew members, teammates, the media and once again, the die-hard fans, without so much as blinking an eye because it "comes with the territory."

 

Contrary to the public image which she must continually maintain for the sake of her man's career, the lifestyle is nothing close to the glamourous, enviable image that those of us who romanticize it from afar may be led to believe.  For 36 weeks out of every year, these women quietly accept the fact that "team time" must often take precedence over "family time;" that they, the faithful wives, are left to manage family emergencies, sibling rivalries, bloody noses, soccer practices, blown fuses, overflowing toilets, financial crises and the like, in the absence of the head of the household; and further, they appear for all intents and purposes to accept the role and its accompanying responsibilities as "all in a day's work," without openly voicing a single complaint.

 

In actuality, how many of us who so easily romanticize her lifestyle from a distance could truly measure up under the constant pressure of being in the limelight and upholding an image "expected" by those to whom her husband is constantly at the beckoning call?  And realistically speaking, who among us could exhibit a strength equal to the likes of Teresa Earnhardt, Liz Allison and Susan Bonnett among others, whose husbands were laid to rest in the sudden and unexpected aftermath of the unthinkable; or mothers of the caliber of Judy Allison, Martha Nemechek and Patti Petty whose sons were taken in the midst of what should have been the prime of their lives?  Indeed, these ladies and many others are genuine representations of the most tremendous of strengths under the most tragic of circumstances, qualities that the rest of us can only admire and appreciate from afar.  And dream though we may of stepping into their shoes and onto the arm of one of Nascar's most talented and irresistably handsome gentlemen, in all reality the aspects so freely glamourized by the media disappear into oblivion the moment that the cameras stop rolling, the moment the race of the week is forever recorded in the sport's history books, the moment that a beloved driver is seriously injured or killed and the loving wife is left behind to pick up the pieces on her own in the face of the unthinkable...in short, it is a position that many desire but few could truly measure up to.  And bearing in mind the "reality" behind the demanding schedules, business and sponsor obligations, millions of adoring female fans and the underlying sense of dread when facing the very real possibility of sudden and tragic loss, this writer has come to the realistic conclusion that such an honor is better bestowed upon those ladies who are more closely rooted and grounded in the sport than the average observer: those possesing the inner strength of Teresa Earnhardt; or the business-savvy aptitude of Delana Harvick; the quiet and graceful presence of Krissy Newman, Katie Kenseth or Ingrid Vandebosch-Gordon; the loyal and supportive (albeit extremely nervewracking) on-camera demeanor of Kim Burton, etc.  As for me (and most likely every other female who has ever secretly dreamed of becoming part of the enviable "Nascar Wife" inner circle), I shall henceforth and forever remain content to enjoy the status of "loyal fan" and support my driver of choice from the comfort of my faithful living room couch, thus eliminating the exhausting outside obligations and expectations that go hand-in-hand with the image, or the urge to reach out and smack every dreamy-eyed female fan requesting my man's autograph in permanent marker on "parts unmentionable."

 

But the best part of keeping things simple?  By far, the clear and unobstructed view of that awesome signature "Victory Backflip" from the comfort and privacy of my own living room.

 

I think I can live with that!

Cheers, Jeers And Championships: Where The Rubber Meets The Road

At every race track on the circuit, they are out there: the drivers we love, the drivers we hate, and the drivers we "love to hate"--each of them with one common goal in mind: the pursuit of a Nascar championship. Irrespective of the level of competition--Cup, Nationwide or Camping World Series--the title "Champion" carries with it the ultimate mark of prestige. It says to those in the racing world and to fans everywhere, "I am the best," and it further sets apart each driver attaining the honor into a most elite and exclusive group of individuals who have placed a permanent and indelible mark into the sport's history books.

We are all familiar with the names: Earnhardt, Petty, Waltrip, Elliott, Wallace, Stewart, Gordon and Johnson, just to name a select few. Even if their respective tenures as champions took place before our personal introductions into Nascar, nevertheless everyone who claims to be a die-hard follower of the sport has at least "heard" of their histories whether or not they were privileged to witness their respective heydays on a firsthand basis. And everyone claiming at least minimal knowledge of the sport is aware through sheer common sense that in order to be crowned a champion, one must meet certain common criteria--foremost amongst such being consistency on the track combined with sheer talent behind the wheel.

But alongside of the "obvious," there is another equally important characteristic that comes into play at some point along the line--one that isn't so much written in objective black-and-white as it is subjective through the eyes of the fans.

In one word: respectability.

Sure, a driver's personality must posess a certain "rough around the edges" quality that lets his competitors know in no uncertain terms that he means business on the track. Without the proper combination of "good guy/bad guy" underlying his public character, one might otherwise be perceived as too "vanilla"--bland, boring, and fitting somewhere outside the realm of the appropriate "mold" that we the fans attribute to someone of true championship caliber. But from the opposite extreme, there exists an understandable level of fan displeasure and disdain when the sport's "bad boys" behave a bit "too" badly for their own good or the good of the sport as a whole. We have all witnessed the trademark tirades of a select few individuals who erroneously believe that their undeniable talents and abilities behind the wheel have somehow elevated them to the status of a god of one sort or another, oftentimes to the point where they practically demand the respect of both their fellow competitors and their fan base--not realizing that respect at any level is something that must be earned before it is extended.

When the rubber truly meets the road, who is the sport's "real" champion as seen through the eyes of the public fan base? And what sort of individual posesses the greater potential to properly and most appropriately represent racing and all that it truly stands for during his year-long tenure at the top of the charts? While thoughts may differ a bit regarding one concrete response, it is the opinion of your writer that a champion (or championship contender) who fails to earn the respect and admiration of his public is just another "winner" whose name and statistics are duly recorded in the history books.

Nothing more.

To illustrate, let's take a hypothetical look at Driver A vs Driver B. Driver A's record on track speaks for itself. Statistically, he races consistently--running in the top 5 and no worse than the top 10 each and every week, and even scoring a few victories along the way. He drives for an organization of "super power" caliber, boasting of nothing less than the very best in equipment and personnel that money can buy. But that's only half the story. On the race track, he has somehow managed to earn himself quite the reputation for "stopping at nothing" in pursuit of the sort of finish that culminates in the ultimate prize: hoisting the trophy at the season finale. In his quest to be the best, he has purposely wrecked countless competitors, on some occasions including his own teammates, totally destroying their equipment and perhaps contributing to some level of physical injury along the way, and rarely if ever with an apology to follow. One step further, his post-crash or post-race interviews are almost always laced with some sort of self-promotion intended to make his fellow drivers appear to be the villains while he emerges (or so he would like to make everyone believe) smelling like the proverbial rose. And then he wonders why he is continually greeted with a resounding chorus of boo's and hisses during driver introductions and in Victory Lane. As if the fans would actually take pleasure in hailing his accomplishments when his focus is on only one thing--himself, at the expense of everyone else in the field. Hmm--maybe he could stand to take a good, long look at himself in a mirror; therein he just might find the answer to his question.

By contrast, Driver B could represent any organization in the venue, be it superteam level, middle of the road, or working its way up the success ladder. He may represent the hopeful newcomer in search of his first career victory, or the "middle ground" driver who has tasted a certain level of success in the form of either a single career win or a few "scattered" victories, or the driver who has been the "bridesmaid" rather than the "bride" on multiple occasions, just barely missing out on the smallest margin of points standing between himself and the coveted title, yet always accepting his seasonal ranking with the greatest of humility and sportsmanship. He is the driver who hears the cheers of the crowd and responds with a smile and a wave rather than an attitude of "everybody's looking at me." And he is the one who, when all is said and done, leaves the track each week knowing that he has given it "his all," irrespective of the outcome. He is respectful toward his many loyal fans, often attributing just as much of his success to them as he credits to his sponsors and his organization as a whole, knowing that without the fans, his career (and the sport itself) would be nothing. He is, in essence, the individual that everyone takes pride in looking up to, or the one to whom his fellow drivers often go seeking advice (which he extends freely, remembering that someone once helped "him" get off the ground too.) And he is, in many ways, a champion's champion who may or may not have ever actually hoisted the trophy and held the title--and it all boils down to one simple concept--respect.

I don't know about those of you amongst my readership, but as for me, given a choice between "respectability" and "mere ability" when defining what constitutes a true champion, I would go for the former any day of the week. The objective criteria of point standings and statistics only tell part of the story. The personable, genuine driver who knows how to relate to the fans, sponsors and media, and who is willing to extend a handshake instead of a fist to the driver who takes him out of contention, or to the reporter simply doing his job in the aftermath of a crash, is the one who posesses the most basic qualities that exemplify championship character.

And that is something that every driver could ultimately stand to learn from.