F1 championship closer than NASCAR

Lewis Hamilton, Felipe Massa, Kimi Raikkonen, Monte-Carlo, 2008, qualifying, 470150

Formula 1 often gets compared unfavourably with NASCAR, especially in America where NASCAR is king. Among the various criticisms levelled at F1, some fair and some not, is the charge that Formula 1 is too predictable and the same drivers win all the time.

Four years ago, when Michael Schumacher won 12 of the first 13 races, it was a reasonable point. But has that stared to change?

Last year the top three drivers were within one point of each other at the end of the season. Halfway through 2008 the top three are tied in F1, but the NASCAR Sprint Cup is looking rather one-sided.

F1 championship standings

1. Lewis Hamilton 48 (three wins)
2. Felipe Massa 48 (three wins)
3. Kimi Raikkonen 48 (two wins)

Full F1 points standings

NASCAR Sprint Cup standings

1. Kyle Busch 2,881 (seven wins)
2. Dale Earnhardt Jr. 2,619 (one win)
3. Jeff Burton 2,590 (one win)

The F1 points system awards the title to the driver who scores the most points over a season. In the event of a tie, drivers are ranked by who has the most best finishes. So Hamilton and Massa are ahead of Raikkonen (three wins each to two) and Hamilton is ahead of Massa (one tenth place to none).

NASCAR uses a system called the ‘Chase for the Sprint Cup’ to ensure the championship battle lasts until late in the season. Ahead of the final ten races the top 12 drivers’ championship points total are reset to the same level and although they continue to race all the other drivers, only one of those 12 can be champion.

Of course, this means that the best driver over the course of the entire season doesn’t necessarily become the champion. (Read more on how the Chase works here).

F1 and NASCAR could not be more different in concept. And it’s surprising to see that in F1, where the performance of different cars can be great, the championship battle is so close. Meanwhile in NASCAR, where the cars are practically identical, Kyle Busch has won more races than the other top ten NASCAR drivers put together.

How has Formula 1 become so close? And why is Busch doing so well?

Busch drives for Toyota in NASCAR and his successes are regularly booed by a large number of NASCAR fans who resent seeing a driver of a Japanese car doing so well in an America-based series. Busch is apparently going to drive Toyota’s F1 car at the end of the year. As one of the most well-recognised American racing drivers it would be a gigantic PR coup if the 23 year-old got a race seat.

Advert | Go Ad-free

37 comments on F1 championship closer than NASCAR

1 2 3
  1. It’s amazing how close and exciting the past two F1 seasons have been. It makes you wonder if those complaining about the state of F1 and how little overtaking there is and blah blah blah, I wonder if they are all just talking complete nonsense. I will say this: if 2009 — with its new regulations — turns out to be a bore, I will scream.

  2. It is shaping up to be a fight to the finish for the F1 title…the good news about Nascar is that they do reshuffle the points when the Chase begins. Kyle Busch is so dominant now, but could falter when it counts.

  3. I think some of the reason for the standings becoming closer is that the regs have caused the cars to become much more similar to each other. When I first started visiting F1 blogs, I recall getting a response to a comment about how far apart teams’ performances seemed to be (that year, how slow Spyker were) and I got a response that the cars’ times have never been closer, it just wasn’t showing on the standings yet.

    It’s starting to show on the standings now.

    Yes, it’s the same usual suspects qualifying well, but the regs have now made it difficult enough on the drivers that there can be performance problems again, if not in the cars, than in the drivers, that we have a reason to watch: if Ferrari or McLaren make a grave mistake, someone from a mid-level team is going to score the good points, and someone we don’t expect to see getting points is going to earn some.

    An English fellow I was talking to commented that he saw a Nascar race where the driver was changed. I explained that although all the attention is put on the drivers, in truth, historically, Nascar is a competition between the cars and that the driver is not even obligated to qualify his own car for the race. Somehow, Nascar’s media machine have forgotten that when they made all the cars the same.

    As an aside, I’ve noticed that the current Nascar has problems with dirty air and drafting.

    The F1 twin championships of the Constructor’s (the competition between the cars) and Driver’s (the competition between the people in the cars) is specifically designed to prove who is best. Nascar’s cup system was overhauled to generate TV money.

    I’ve gathered for a while that Formula 1 are at the end of an era; perhaps we are seeing a foreshadow of better times ahead.

  4. Robert McKay said on 13th July 2008, 16:44

    I’m going to sound like a stuck record here, but F1 2007 was not exciting. It was on paper because the championship was so close but only three races (Canada, China and Japan) were really any good.

    Having said that F1 2008 is genuinely very good. We’ve already had 4 great races and we’re only halfway into the season (Australia, Canada, Monaco and Britain), so we’re up on 2007 in my book.

    But the F1 regs still need fixed. Dry races are still largely uninspiring, the odd race excepted. What the big help is is being able to race in the wet… It’s all the extra variables that wet running brings that really have added a lot to F1 over the last couple of seasons. Obviously it can’t be done in NASCAR, but the sea change that occurs when it rains is so important to F1. Barrichello on the podium would not have happened in the dry.

    NASCAR’s Chase System is brilliant for shooting themselves in the foot too. What’s the point of a 36-race calendar (or whatever it is) if only the last 10 decide who is champion? I presume most of the top drivers are just content to be in the Chase positions and cruise for most of the season, be safe, and then watch the leaders come back to you as the adjust the points. It’s as artificial as WTCC’s race-by-race ballast decisions and is, ironically, similar to the complaints levelled at F1 in that going for the win is not encouraged because you only get a couple more points. A win in the non-Chase NASCAR rounds is considerably less important. Good for glory, but means a lot less from a championship view.

  5. Robert: That is exactly what happens in Nascar; in the US we compare it to the NHL hockey playoff system, where teams just try to be among the best 16 and don’t play seriously until they’re in the Stanley Cup tournament.

    It works for generating ratings on a big calendar, but we know that competitively, it makes no sense. The other cars only run in the post-season to collect advertising and possibly steal away some of the prize purse.

  6. TommyB said on 13th July 2008, 17:40

    The NASCAR system is awful. Imagine being 5-0 up in a world cup final and it getting to the 80th minute and they reset the score to make it closer! If they were that bothered why not make it 20 for first, 19 for second etc. instead of 400,000 for first, 390,000 for second or whatever the hell it is

  7. mJohnHurt said on 13th July 2008, 17:55

    Kyle Busch has been getting booed for years, I don’t think it has anything to do with driving a Toyota (this is his first year doing so). I think the recent booing is mostly caused by wrecking Dale Earnhart Jr. (by far the most popular driver in NASCAR) earlier this year. While we Americans can be xenophobic, sometimes a driver’s just perceived as a jerk, no matter what car he’s driving =).

    FWIW, I’ve never understood the “foreign car” concept. Until recently I lived very close to the Princeton, Indiana Toyota production facility which employed a large number of my fellow citizens, pumping a ton of money into the local economy. In 2002 I was shopping for a new car and had narrowed it down to a Toyota or a Ford. I went to the Ford dealership and asked them to tell me why I should buy theirs over the Toyota, and the first thing the guy said was “it’s American made”. Unbelievable…

  8. Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 13th July 2008, 18:16

    mJohnHurt – I agree with you about the nationalism thing, it does matter to some people, but I’m not accusing the entire population of American of being xenophobes! I understand Earnhardt Jnr’s popular though, so that must have as much to do with it as the Toyota thing. I’m told Busch is pretty handy, but I can’t really judge if he could (or would want to) make the jump.

  9. Sav22 said on 13th July 2008, 19:15

    Montoya did say that Kyle will have to train his neck muscles before he tests the Toyota F1 car, or his neck won’t cope with the G-Forces apparently.

    Certainly I would imagine to start with, Kyle would get overtaken in the braking zones, as he is not used to braking heavily like in F1. NASCAR only runs on two road courses a season.

  10. Robert McKay said on 13th July 2008, 19:22

    “NASCAR only runs on two road courses a season.”

    Which is a shame, because from what I saw of the one road course they’ve run on so far this season it actually looked quite good. Cars are a handful, very squirrely under braking, very tail happy putting the power down, lots of outbraking moves and a very good road course to boot. Similar to the Speedcar series, but with cars that looked less unwieldy, more reliable and (much, much) more of them. If they could get it up to 5 or 6 that would actually be more welcome, but I suppose that’s not going to happen.

    It would be interesting to hear of the hardcore NASCAR fans views on the road course races – do they tolerate them, hate them, ambivalent on them, wish there was just two more ovals or what?

  11. Ben said on 13th July 2008, 19:25

    @ Robert Mckay, Im sorry but 2007 was the most exciting F1 season since 1999 in my book. If you found last season boring then how did you last through 2002 & 2004, not seasons I found boring but much more predictable, and unmemorable than last years epic!

    What has been your favourite season since 1995? (I only say from then because it was the first season I fully watched)

    No nastyness ment by this post I just don’t really see why you thought last year wasn’t exciting? Ben x

  12. M Smith said on 13th July 2008, 19:51

    Jumping into the conversation here, but Robert may not have “lasted through” 2002 and 2004, I certainly didn’t!

    I’ve watched F1 full-time since 1997, and I was a supporter of Schumi for a long time until he started dominating so much so that after a couple of races in 2002, I abandoned it right through until 2005. It was annoying that 2003 turned out a be a good season.

    In my opinion, 2007 was by no-means the best season I’ve seen. As a whole, the results were very close, but only 4 races in the season were exciting, the rest were bore-fests. Compare that to 1995, where the season was practically drenched with the rain! On paper, it wasn’t close, but the races were amazing!

    2008 is doing very well so far, 4 great races out of 9, and the results are close.

  13. Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 13th July 2008, 20:39

    “Squirrely”

    Robert McKay leads the ‘adjective of the year’ contest I just created.

    As for what makes an exciting season…

    2007 had an exciting narrative, no question. Spygate and Hamilton vs Alonso were two enormous stories. But which were the great races? There was no Suzuka ’05 or Silverstone ’03 – by which I mean no ‘pure’ good race that wasn’t a safety car smashfest or a wet race.

    2003 and 2005 on the other hand had some of the kind of politics we remember ’07 for (the Michelin tyre ban and the Indianapolis debacle) but also exciting races of the kind we really didn’t have last year, as Robert points out.

  14. Robert McKay said on 13th July 2008, 20:53

    “@ Robert Mckay, Im sorry but 2007 was the most exciting F1 season since 1999 in my book. If you found last season boring then how did you last through 2002 & 2004, not seasons I found boring but much more predictable, and unmemorable than last years epic!
    What has been your favourite season since 1995? (I only say from then because it was the first season I fully watched)
    No nastyness ment by this post I just don’t really see why you thought last year wasn’t exciting?”

    No worries Ben it’s a fair point. 2002 and 2004 were also incredibly dull years. Even more so than 2007, because they had fewer memorable Grands Prix without the closeness of the title fight to match (though there were a few good ones). I think my point about 2007 still stands – sure, the title fight was exciting and close, but how many times did that spill onto the track? Rarely. Most of the GPs were individually quite dull. The aero is destroying the ability to even run close, let alone pass, and that problem has just got worse and worse as long as I’ve been following the sport.

    This year has all the closeness of last years title fight, plus more memorable races already, so it’s shaping up to be a classic. In terms of good seasons, 1999 as you say, 2000 as well, 2003 was pretty good too because three teams were fighting it out. 2005 was a great season too.

  15. Keith, “squirrelly” is one of those terms that Americans took up, like saying “tight” and “loose” instead of understeering and oversteering. It describes the wheelslip from stepping on the accelerator if you didn’t gather.

    I think the closeness of the races and how good they’ve been is a bit more luck than anything else; I think most of the craziness we’ve seen are from the teams failing to adapt to the changes and we can expect more of that in the coming years.

1 2 3

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.