Sports Bronies

[Hippo]

While I agree with you, brian, I will say that it's unrealistic to expect athletes to ignore the dangers and possible death. Of course in any sport death is possible. But a series like Indycar has become a gladiator sport where the risk is very high and the rewards aren't nearly as good. NASCAR had a dark two years in 2000 and 2001 when 4 regular drivers passed away because of accidents. Since then, several changes have been made to the cars, the safety harnesses, the outside and inside walls at the tracks, and the regulations that allow drivers to drive a certain way. Since Dale Sr.'s death at the 2001 Daytona 500, no Nascar driver has died while inside a racecar. Indycar seems to ignore these most important details and plans on their drivers running flatout. While it's more exciting for people to watch, I feel that deadly sports like this should only be seen in movies and that the measure of humanity in America and sport across the world have the well being of the athletes in consideration. I can't imagine we'd ever have a voluntary sport like pod racing (yes, from Star Wars the Phantom Menace). I remember one year they cancelled the race at Texas Motor Speedway because the cars were pulling speeds of 230mph in the corner, which produced 9 G's of force on the driver, which is the point where your brain blacksout. They cancelled the race not because they deemed it unsafe, but because the drivers boycotted it. So Indycar drivers are quitting their series and driving NASCAR series races because they risk is lower, and their paycheck is way bigger. And furthermore, NHRA is the fastest motorsport where cars exceed speeds of 300 mph, and hitting that speed from a standstill in less than 4 seconds. Yet even the NHRA has less deaths than Indycar. More comparitively, the more international version Formula 1, which is arguably the most prestigious motorsport in the world, hasn't had a fatality since 1994, and Indycar have has 4 since 96.

I'm a huge fan, so i obviously have a more personal opinion about it. I love watching the races. But when the drivers aren't having fun because they're fearing for their life, then they don't race to win, and is therefore less fun for the spectator.

[kal413]

I am rather surprised how people keep saying "how can this happen", when the answers are apparent.

It's a rhetorical question, though Riverhippo pretty much nailed it.

[KrystalHeart]

Not really a sporty person, but I do play badminton/table tennis with neighbors casually. Never made it to the school team before.

[BlackFang]

I am rather surprised how people keep saying "how can this happen", when the answers are apparent. Racing cars, especially very light weight cars such as formula cars are always vulnerable to these tragedies, there is always that risk when you drive around a track at those speeds against other competitors. Dan Wheldon isn't the first to die in a formula car accident; there were two others in the last decade (still incredibly low considering all the potential risk). Even in NASCAR where vehicles are significantly better designed for safety we had deaths. Its that risk you take when you decide to race at high speeds.

aaaaand, this is where i step in, complementing (and also countering a bit) what hippo said, this is my little insight on the matter:

it wasnt the car's fault, it was the oval's fault.

explaining myself (this is gonna take a while, you might want to take a seat)

taking this crash involving brazilian Barrichello and german R. Schumacher (airborne) back in the 2002 season as base, it was, fundamentally, the same kind of crash as the one that killed Dan: rear car fails to stop and gets airborne when entering in contact with one of the fronts car's rear wheels. Both Barrichello and Schumacher left their cars totally unharmed, these are the differences:

1. the most logical one: Speed, the apex speed at the turn that crash happened (1st one of the circuit) is roughly 90-95 mph against the average 220ish mph on a 1.5 mile oval. obviously any kind of accident has more chances of going wrong the higher the speed it happens.

2. the "shape" of the circuit: on an overbanked oval turn, due to movement physics, 1st Newton's law, the cars tend to go outside and up. the same instant something goes wrong on the cars aerodynamics things will get ugly, even worse at the time the car loses control like this. There have been a huge lot of really awful accidents on ovals due to this.

3. safety measures are almost nonexistant on ovals. on circuits, the turns always have an emergency space of sorts, having a gravel bed or a higher grip asphalt that works wonders at reducing an uncontrolled car's speed, which, ultimately, gets received by a multi-tiered-tire-barrier that absorbs most of the impact. on ovals you get a foam wall (the aptly named S.A.F.E.R. walls) and a link fence right at the border of the track. differences are obvious.

to wrap it up, lets make a parallel between the 2 crashes, which happened on similarly configured cars, the safety measures are virtually identical.

the f1 cars are running at near 180 mph on the main straight when they have to brake to take turn 1 (a 70ish degree hard-apex turn) the crash happens at both cars nearing 100 mph. Schumacher's car gets airborne, lands some (a lot) of meters ahead on the gravel bed reducing its speed and hits the tire barrier, the impact measures something like 7 g's iirc, the car's main "survival cell" is intact and the pilot is just a little dizzy.

The indy car was running near the 210 mph mark when the multiple crash happens ahead. Dan brakes but makes contact with the car ahead at over 170 mph, the car goes airborne on a turn, going straight into the -really hard- chain link fence. the impact has been calculated to have been near 20 g's. the whole car ends nearly absolutely destroyed, with Dan not dying instantly due to an incomplete miracle.

it is not free that the F.I.A. hasnt acknowledged Nascar nor IRL as official racing series.

as for me: ovals ARE dangerous and should be banned, yes, even the Indy 500, a little extreme i know, but the life of a person should have priority. Next year's IRL security updates tackle rather directly this exact kind off accident, but even with those, there still exist a lot of danger factors regarding the ovals, not the cars.

[Rocky]

What I've done: Karate, archery, t-ball/baseball, and soccer (hated it).

What I'm doing now: Erm.. Drumming? Nothing sport-relate up to date... Splitting firewood?

[Otsdarva]

The IRL should rethink running Open-Wheel cars on Ovals, especially those NASCAR frequently run as the banking allows them to run with no to minimal braking. That being the key difference, the lack of braking is what allows them to remain bunched together so well. The last thing you want is a field of 34 Open-Wheel race cars running 200 laps less than a foot apart from each other. There's also the catch fence, which at the speeds they were going sheered the cars the sheds. Having a cockpit first impact, it was a wonder he wasn't killed instantly.

It's said that death comes in 3's. A terrible shame that Dan Wheldon had to die and he will be truly missed. And sadly he wasn't the only death in Motorsports. Shortly after the death of Wheldon Off-road racer and champion Rick Huseman was killed in a plane crash in California. And finally, I'm sure even if you haven't been a fan you'll have probably heard by now of the death of MotoGP Rising star Marco Simoncelli who was killed last week after losing control of his bike and getting hit by two fellow riders.

All Three men were class acts and caring, friendly people. All three will be greatly missed. Please let October end without any more tragedy.

[Hippo]

I do like me some F1. It's too bad it's not excepted very well in the states, though. I have tickets to the US Grand Prix in Austin next year on my wishlist.

And oval racing can be fun to watch, only with the right regulations. Indycar on ovals has turned into mayhem. Imagine trying to break the land speed record, and realizing that the only way to do it is use the power of a nuclear missile. After a while, it just doesn't make any sense.

[Hippo]

One of the greatest World Series in baseball history has just concluded. The St. Louis Cardinals won game 7 6-2 against the Texas Rangers to wins the series 4 games to 3.

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/gameday/index.jsp?gid=2011_10_28_texmlb_slnmlb_1&mode=gameday&c_id=mlb

Now for my personal note:

I am devastated. I, much like Applejack, am usually a good sport about losing and seeing my teams lose. But God... The Rangers were one strike away from winning the series in game 6, not once, but twice! The Cardinals just wouldn't go away. And now they are world champions in 2011. Again, great series, but the agony i feel from this loss is severely disappointing. And the way the Rangers lost is most disappointing. The Rangers, and their fans, will not recover from this until we get back to the series and win it, which the team has never done. I don't think this is nearly as bad as the Red Sox's Bill Buckner, or the Chicago Cubs' Steve Bartman in terms of choking. But this indeed is a choke.

Ok, I'm done ranting. Now please excuse me while I barf.

[kal413]

I know how you feel.

That's definitely why I don't like play-off systems, and especially not series systems. That's all based on whoever wins a couple of games, instead of who was the best throughout the entire season, which would truly be the champion. That's how it is with European Football.

[Dessa]

There's less tension in a strict point system though, like UEFA's. If a team is up 3 games out by a huge margin, you already know who's won.

OTOH, with a tourney, once you're in, you've got a shot. Maybe not a good one, but a shot. It can make for some fun games.

I don't watch baseball much, but that sounded like a great series.

[kal413]

There's less tension in a strict point system though, like UEFA's. If a team is up 3 games out by a huge margin, you already know who's won.

OTOH, with a tourney, once you're in, you've got a shot. Maybe not a good one, but a shot. It can make for some fun games.

I don't watch baseball much, but that sounded like a great series.

Yeah

That's why they also have cups, which I prefer to watch because they are so much more nerve-wrecking.

[Hippo]

I know how you feel.

That's definitely why I don't like play-off systems, and especially not series systems. That's all based on whoever wins a couple of games, instead of who was the best throughout the entire season, which would truly be the champion. That's how it is with European Football.

No, I love the baseball playoff system. it's better than playing a one and done game like some sports do. The sport of the American pasttime knows that one game can't decide the better team. St. Louis won it fair and square, I don't think anyone would argue that. And the Yankees are usually the best team in the American League every year as they were this year, but they got eliminated early. It's their own fault for not getting it done in playoff contention.

I would agree that some sports have questionable playoff formats though. The NHL allows more than half the league to go into postseason play, which means that a team could easily end the season with a losing record and still have a chance to win the Stanley Cup. Usually, though, the better teams end on top anyway.

[FIM Fan]

No, I love the baseball playoff system. it's better than playing a one and done game like some sports do. The sport of the American pasttime knows that one game can't decide the better team. St. Louis won it fair and square, I don't think anyone would argue that. And the Yankees are usually the best team in the American League every year as they were this year, but they got eliminated early. It's their own fault for not getting it done in playoff contention.

I would agree that some sports have questionable playoff formats though. The NHL allows more than half the league to go into postseason play, which means that a team could easily end the season with a losing record and still have a chance to win the Stanley Cup. Usually, though, the better teams end on top anyway.

I am a big Yankees fan so I agree with you. Their hitting was pretty good. They had the opportunity and they blew it. I really hope they get Sabathia back they really do need him. I seriously believe 2012 will be our year.

[Dessa]

Dude, Yankees have had a TON of years. Let it be someone else's year /yankeehate Like the Twins ;_;

[Hippo]

...the Twins...

[Dessa]

Hey, they've put together some good seasons. But with the most lopsided team in baseball always their first round opponent, what are they gonna do? The Yankees are the 1%. What the heck you gonna do when they can just BUY their way to victory every other year.

Baseball is a broken sport.

[BlackFang]

Hey, they've put together some good seasons. But with the most lopsided team in baseball always their first round opponent, what are they gonna do? The Yankees are the 1%. What the heck you gonna do when they can just BUY their way to victory every other year.

Baseball is a broken sport.

meh, happens to EVERY sport, see the Barcelona/Real Madrid supremacy in Spain, or (sort of) the Manchester's teams in England, or the F1 team with the highest paid engineer making their cars and obliterating the season(Red Bull). Also but averted: Miami Heat.

[kal413]

Barcelona/Real Madrid supremacy in Spain, or (sort of) the Manchester's teams in England

Manchester City wasn't even taken seriously until last year, so I'd hardly call that a supremacy. Nevertheless, the Big Four were usually always dominating. That has changed in the past few years when Totenham broke the Big Four, so that's some good news.

As for Real Madrid and Barcelona, that's a lost cause. There is no competition in Spain.

The rest of the world seems fine.

[Hippo]

meh, happens to EVERY sport, see the Barcelona/Real Madrid supremacy in Spain, or (sort of) the Manchester's teams in England, or the F1 team with the highest paid engineer making their cars and obliterating the season(Red Bull). Also but averted: Miami Heat.

True. But the Yankees are actually a joke. Even though they 28 (i think) World Championships, they should have more for the money they pay. Highest payroll does not equal championships, and the Yankees disappointments after writing that check serverely outwieghs the championships they buy. Many think a salary cap is needed in MLB. But because the Yankees haven't won as many as they probably should, I don't think it would make any difference. And the second highest payroll in MLB is usually the Cubs, and I don't know enough vocabulary to describe the hilarity of that baseball club.

[FIM Fan]

Dude, Yankees have had a TON of years. Let it be someone else's year /yankeehate Like the Twins ;_;

Hey, I am cool with giving teams a chance to win. I seriously don't really mind much if the Yankees don't win for the next ten years in the World Series. I just have 2 circumstances. It Can't be the Red Sox and it Can't be the Phillies that win the World Series. (I can't stand either team for obvious reasons. The Red Sox have been my enemy since day fricken one. And the Phillies, let's just say I had a bad experience with the fans when I went to their ball park).

And I do agree more money doesn't always mean more championships. But, I think they have been doing a lot less money spending then they really used to. I'm just happy their farm is so full of talented young pitchers. I think you and the rest of the people are gonna see the Yankees actually spend a little less money then they did before.

[Dessa]

It happens in every sport to an extent, but it's made more extreme in sports that lack salary caps. UEFA's kinda broken in that respect too. And if it wasn't horribly difficult to watch in the US, I would be more upset.

Basketball has dynasties because of payrolls to a degree, but the salary cap ensures some parity. Basketball's problem is that a 7 game series means the little guy has a harder chance of making it through.

[brianblackberry]

No, I love the baseball playoff system. it's better than playing a one and done game like some sports do.

The only sport of the "big four" that do "one and done" in the playoffs is football, and there are a whole host of reasons for that, and if you don't realize those then you don't understand football. In fact it is one of the reasons I love the sport, you only get 16 games (12 if you are in college), so falling just a couple behind the leader in the regular season could spell the end of your playoff hopes. When you have 162 games, each one being more or less a crap-shoot (hardly any team ever wins more than 60% of their games in baseball, ever), you are required to have a five or seven game round in the playoffs.

[Hippo]

The only sport of the "big four" that do "one and done" in the playoffs is football, and there are a whole host of reasons for that, and if you don't realize those then you don't understand football. In fact it is one of the reasons I love the sport, you only get 16 games (12 if you are in college), so falling just a couple behind the leader in the regular season could spell the end of your playoff hopes. When you have 162 games, each one being more or less a crap-shoot (hardly any team ever wins more than 60% of their games in baseball, ever), you are required to have a five or seven game round in the playoffs.

Yeah football wouldn't be as climactic in a series. In a way, football has a seven game series. The two teams that face each other have 7 days of preparation for gameday, and how they prepare, the schemes they write up, and the decisions the coaches make all play a part and on Sunday the teams unfold everything they had going on that week. Sure, some teams have more talent than some, but I'm a firm believer in 'any football team can beat any other football team at any time'. I just wish Div 1 college ball would do a playoff system.

[Dessa]

The only sport of the "big four" that do "one and done" in the playoffs is football, and there are a whole host of reasons for that, and if you don't realize those then you don't understand football. In fact it is one of the reasons I love the sport, you only get 16 games (12 if you are in college), so falling just a couple behind the leader in the regular season could spell the end of your playoff hopes. When you have 162 games, each one being more or less a crap-shoot (hardly any team ever wins more than 60% of their games in baseball, ever), you are required to have a five or seven game round in the playoffs.

I agree with BASEball's 7 game system, because, as you pointed out, the win rates tend to match up pretty closely. In addition, baseball isn't as physically intensive as some other sports, so they can play 7 games relatively quickly. Baseball's a slow, thoughful game, so it makes sense too that its playoffs should be the same.

Basketball, OTOH, pretty much requires 1-2 days of rest between games, and sometimes 3. It's fast paced, and there's less parity between the top and bottom. In basketball, a good team is built around fewer players. The Bulls and the Jazz at their heights were based primarily around 2 players (Jordan/Pippen and Malone/Stockton). They had great benches and support, but I can't imagine a baseball team getting by with just 2 good guys and a bunch of support. You need deep pitching. You need 3-4 solid hitters. Upsets in basketball are rarer than baseball, and even with salary caps and profit sharing, basketball has its dynasties. Basketball should drop to a 3 or 5 games series, that way it doesn't run October to June, too.

Compare the NBA Finals to March Madness. March Madness is great because sometimes Colgate University breaks into the sweet 16 and are 3 lucky breaks away from doing the impossible.

I can't really talk about hockey. I know so little of it.

[Hippo]

The NBA Playoffs are painstakingly long, IMO. But the owners would never agree to make the playoffs 5 game series, especially since they can't even agree on terms as of now. And right now, the rumor is that if they can come to an agreement soon and get the NBA season rollin', they might cram the schedule to preserve the 82 games per team schedule. I don't know how hard it'll be though. They can't afford to stretch it because the 2012 Summer Olympic games are gonna own the TV ratings in July and August.