IndyCar’s racing quality “under-credited” – Newgarden

RaceFans Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Multiple IndyCar champion Josef Newgarden says the quality of competition in the series is underestimated in motorsport

In brief

IndyCar’s racing quality “under-credited” – Newgarden

Multiple IndyCar champion Josef Newgarden says the quality of competition in the series is underestimated in motorsport.

Ahead of Saturday night’s race at Gateway, the top seven drivers in the series were separated by just 59 points with three rounds remaining. Newgarden says the level of competition in IndyCar is something to be celebrated.

“I think it’s the best championship in the world, bar none,” Newsgarden said. “There is nothing else that comes close to it.

“I think in some ways it’s under-credited. You look at IndyCar, you can be with any team and have a shot at winning a race when you show up every single weekend. That’s not just a marketing line; it’s a reality. So as much as I love motorsports – this is not to try and build us up or tear others down – it’s just the best championship you will find on the planet with the top-line drivers of the world.”

First year with Alfa Romeo has been “good fun” says Bottas

Valtteri Bottas says he has enjoyed his first season with Alfa Romeo so far after joining the team from Mercedes at the end of last year.

Bottas lost his seat at Mercedes after five seasons alongside Lewis Hamilton before being replaced by George Russell. Bottas has scored 46 points so far in 2022 and sits ninth in the drivers’ championship.

“I think it’s been good,” said Bottas. “I can’t even remember all the season, all the details – it’s hard to compare because everything is quite different this year, but I’m happy with my performances.

“There’s always room for improvement and I always try to be better. But it’s been good fun and I feel like I’ve been driving well.”

MotoGP to introduce sprint races in 2023

MotoGP – the world championship of motorcycle circuit racing – has confirmed that sprint races will be introduced to the series at every grand prix weekend beginning from next season.

A sprint race will be held every Saturday afternoon following qualifying and will be run between 50 and 75 kilometres depending on the circuit – half the distance of a MotoGP grand prix. The grid for the sprint race will be set by qualifying, while the results of the sprint race will not be used to set the grand prix grid, which will also be determined by the traditional qualifying system.

The decision to introduce sprint races in MotoGP follows Formula 1 adopting a similar format last year. This season, sprint races are being held at three of the 22 rounds but are used to determine the grid order for the grand prix itself.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Comment of the day

Stoffel Vandoorne may have been thrilled to have taken the Formula E world title, but reader Alesci was disappointed in his post-race celebrations…

It said a lot when, immediately after winning the championship, Vandoorne did a five point turn to negotiate his car through a tight corner into the podium area on the Olympic running track.In contrast, Mortara then cranked the handbrake and powe-rdrifted his way through the turn with style.

Slow and steady wins the title, but c’mon, the car has no more racing to ever do – show a bit of flair man…
Alesci

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Carolynn Clarke, Socalf1Fan, Adamtys, Scuderiavincero and Mightyspyder!

On this day in motorsport

Felipe Nasr, Sauber, Monza, 2016

Author information

Will Wood
Will has been a RaceFans contributor since 2012 during which time he has covered F1 test sessions, launch events and interviewed drivers. He mainly...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

32 comments on “IndyCar’s racing quality “under-credited” – Newgarden”

  1. Ahhh MotoGP whyyyy

    1. I think they are starting to take the Vale hit. Last 6 or 7 were not that good, even if lots of riders won in this past few years, the riders don’t fight for wins like bike racing is known for. Slipstreaming is not working as it used to because of the aero advances, now riders just run away with it. Tyres are a bit of a lottery. The racing is still fine no need for sprint races. I think it boils down to the loss of popularity.

  2. Indy Car ought to be close, it’s a spec series. To add to that the cars are maybe competitive with F2 in terms of performance. I’m sure if F1 was limited to the speeds of F2/Indy the wake for the cars following would be neater, the racing would be closer, tyre wear would not be such an issue.

    1. F1 would be so much better in every way if it was a bit slower.
      I can’t even count how many times I’ve said that over the last 20 years.

      F1’s biggest enemy is itself.

      1. @S Slower doesn’t automatically guarantee a better racing quality or other aspects.

    2. “Indy Car ought to be close, it’s a spec series.”
      Every racing series should be competetive for all competitors. Otherwise it’s not a sport any more.

  3. Newgarden isn’t wrong, I’d bet you could take the top 10 most accomplished Indy Car drivers and put them in F1, they’d all be competitive there too.

    I wouldn’t ever say F1 is better than Indy because the drivers are better, or the competition is more competitive.

    To me the mystique of F1 will always be the level of investment and development, and that the culmination of hundreds of people’s work, from design to engineering, training and strategy all gets put to the test in a very thrilling race in the fastest, most advanced open wheel cars in competition.

    That there’s so much value in that, to the point where hundreds of millions of dollars are spent on that pursuit of excellence, and it’s managed to maintain that position of top flight of motor racing for so long, is what really attracts me personally.

    It’s not just down to the quality of racing, if I wanted to see the closest racing where anybody can win and it’s all down to skill of the driver, then sure it would make sense to watch Indy. But also any spec series, or Sim racing for that matter.

    1. I wouldnt be as confident as you that top 10 Indy Car drivers would be competitive in F1.
      After Mario Andretti I think only Montoya and Villenevue started at the US series and successfully migrated to F1.
      Saying Indy drivers are worse is wrong – just try to find someone to drive in ovals at 200mph.
      Sincerely the Indycar is more competitive if one consider who could challenge for a win in any given race. Some incidents that one could account as ddriver mistakes are mostly due to cars perfomances differences and much closer racing than in F1.
      But F1 prestige definitely makes the top drivers of any generation to race in F1.
      I think that the top 10 F1 drivers of any year would be a serious contender to Indycar championship. Top 5 F1 driver would be an instant favorite to the title.
      But the average/median F1 driver is better than the average/median Indycar driver. This is almost undeniable as winless/podiumless driver in F1 can win in Indycar. Drivers who raced in European junior series and didnt find a place in F1 turned out competitive in Indycar. Mid grid f1 drivers go to Indycar and start to win.
      In sum, just as AUS Supercars series, Indycar is a competitive series, provide for good racing and have competent drivers, but I think that in F1 current grid one would have to go as deep as Bottas/Gasly to find a driver who couldnt beat most of Indycar grid and you would still hire Alonso even if you had the chance to hire the top3 Indycar drivers.

      1. Sorry, but almost none of these arguments hold any water.

        But F1 prestige definitely makes the top drivers of any generation to race in F1.

        But F1 prestige definitely makes the top drivers of any generation who have the money and race in Europe to race in F1. FTFY

        I think that the top 10 F1 drivers of any year would be a serious contender to Indycar championship. Top 5 F1 driver would be an instant favorite to the title.

        So you are saying a top F1 driver would be a top Indycar driver… wow SHOCKER that a good driver is a good driver.

        This is almost undeniable as winless/podiumless driver in F1 can win in Indycar.

        This is due to the nature of the different series. Max Verstappen in a Williams is not going to win a race except in the most extremely insane fluke of a situation. “Winless/podiumless F1 driver” describes the majority of F1 drivers. Of course they could win in Indycar, because the machinery is more equal. Most of these “winless/podiumless F1 drivers” could, in fact, win a F1 race or bag a podium if they were in a top team.

        Drivers who raced in European junior series and didnt find a place in F1 turned out competitive in Indycar.

        Yes, because we know that getting an F1 seat is entirely merit based and has nothing to do with money and connections.

        Mid grid f1 drivers go to Indycar and start to win.

        They might win a race here and there, but when was the last time a mid grid F1 driver won a modern Indycar championship? I’ll wait…

        you would still hire Alonso even if you had the chance to hire the top3 Indycar drivers.

        Nobody is saying that Indycar is full of Alonsos, merely that the top drivers in Indycar could be competitive in F1 if given the proper machinery.

        1. Like Bourdais?

          1. Bourdais is further proof that you need the right car in F1.
            He was pretty dominant in CART, and then entered F1 in a lower mid-field team – which, only 2 years prior, was Minardi.
            Exactly what should he have achieved in that situation?

          2. @S

            Win a race, like his teammate did.

          3. The small issue with that is that Bourdais’ teammate won a race. And yes, I know that Bourdais also qualified 4th and hard a pretty unlucky race. But in general, it’s true that F1 is a constructor’s series that’s marketed as a drivers’ series.

            The differences between drivers has always been smaller than the fanbase pretends. Even a Stroll or Latifi is a very competent racecar driver. But we’ve also seen that there is a clear difference between the likes of Hamilton, Verstappen, Vettel, and Alonso – and the still very good guys like Pérez, Sainz and Ocon.

            Where each of the Indycar drivers would slot in is impossible to say. That said, F1 drivers going to Indycar have generally done better than Indycar drivers going to F1.

          4. I knew someone would jump to mention Monza quickly.
            I assume we also all acknowledge that the conditions were a bit, shall we say, unusual that weekend?
            Remind me, how many other races did Vettel win in that car…. In ‘normal’ conditions…

            Fisichella won a race in the Jordan. Maldonado won in the Williams. Ocon won in Hungary last year….
            Strange things happen occasionally that can’t be explained purely by ‘talent.’ There’s always some luck and circumstance involved.

          5. @S

            Even if conditions were unusual, they were equal for both Sebs on that weekend.

          6. @S

            But it doesn’t end there. Bourdais only made it into the points twice in the entire 2008 season, while his teammate scored at 9 of the 18 GPs.

            Vettel outqualified him 13:5, too.

          7. The situation in Monza was indeed unusual, but it was not a fluke. Both Toro Rosso’s were on the pace throughout the weekend: Vettel and Bourdais both. As mentioned, Vettel had the clear measure of Bourdais all season and when the car was genuinely good (whether that was set-up or characteristics) it was Vettel who capitalized and made the most of the opportunity, not Bourdais. Now Vettel was still young but would become the third most succesful F1 driver ever, so perhaps measuring Bourdais against him is holding him up to standards most F1 drivers would also not meet.

            But nevertheless, one can also look at Montoya or Villeneuve. Both very talented and skilled drivers, both of whom could win, but they weren’t the class of the field and ended up leaving F1 without achieving the success many expected them to based on their earlier career in the USA.

        2. But F1 prestige definitely makes the top drivers of any generation who have the money and race in Europe to race in F1.

          Can you name 2 or 3 of those lost talents that didnt get the money to race in Europe? Or the 2 or 3 US born drivers that could replace VER, HAM, LEC?

          So you are saying a top F1 driver would be a top Indycar driver… wow SHOCKER that a good driver is a good driver.

          No, I am saying that top F1 drivers are better that most Indy drivers and that top Indy drivers are not better than most F1 drivers.

          They might win a race here and there, but when was the last time a mid grid F1 driver won a modern Indycar championship? I’ll wait…

          Where to you think Palou or Franchitti would race/finish in F1 on the last 10 years? For comparison, McLaughlin is already winning in Indy.

          Nobody is saying that Indycar is full of Alonsos, merely that the top drivers in Indycar could be competitive in F1 if given the proper machinery.

          Here you are confirming my point or we are talking about different things. In F1, a team with one GP win in the decade has Alonso driving for them. AM had Vettel. I will probably agree with you, if you point to 3 Indy drivers that would perform better than Ocon, but we will disagree if you expect me to accept that a top Indycar drivers in a F1 team driving Alpine or below would beat Alonso or Vettel.

      2. This is exactly the type of post that I expect from F1 fans – especially those who don’t really watch much from other series.

        The truth is that F1 drivers aren’t ‘better’ or more talented than drivers in other series. They make the ‘best’ F1 drivers, but that’s about it.
        Every series has their unique range of drivers – and a driver that is highly successful or well adapted to one is not necessarily equally well-suited to another.

        And about unsuccessful F1 drivers finding success in other series – that just shows how drastically unequal and non-driver-based the chances for success are in F1, and nothing at all about the level of talent in other series.

    2. “Newgarden isn’t wrong, I’d bet you could take the top 10 most accomplished Indy Car drivers and put them in F1, they’d all be competitive there too.”
      Of course.
      Although there isn’t even 10 competetive cars in F1. You could fill the entire F1 grid with 20 Michael Schumacher clones – and the 4 ones driving RedBulls and Ferraris would be called great drivers and all of the Michaels driving Williamses and such would be called poor F1 drivers.

    3. Not necessarily. There are differences in how the cars handle. You can take a top-flight driver from GP2/F2, put them in Formula 1, and there’s no guarantee they’ll light up the timesheets.

      Ricciardo, Vettel, and a few others have proven that a dramatic difference in chassis handling can make or break a driver’s season.

  4. Nooooo, MotoGp too?(At least normal qualy sets the grid for the main race)

  5. Those fans who love the sport more than the gimmick ridden show are quickly running out of things to watch sadly because now gimmicks and other artificial elements are clearly seen as been more important than the integrity of the sport.

    Who cares about the passionate, Knowledgeable & dedicated ‘not normal’ (Ross Brawns words) fans when you can chase the casuals who don’t care about the sport and don’t have the same love, respect or passion for the sport and care only about a constant action show to give them a reason to post about something on social media.

    It’s clear where the world of motor sport is going and it’s obviously no longer been aimed at those who actually care about it and would watch everything if we weren’t been actively shoved away from it.

  6. It really does get harder to find the enthusiasm to watch racing these days, now Moto GP is going down the gimmick road, I even had a hard time watching Le Mans this year as Eurosport insist on constantly showing adverts and didnt stay awake for all of the race as I was just `adverted out`, I had to go to Youtube and watch the uninterrupted onboard now and then just to get away from adverts.

  7. Indycar is not ‘under-credited’ it is its own worst enemy, flaky setups that do not work from year to year at the same circuits, circuits that
    generate so many yellow flags that the races becomes hard to watch (Nashville), circuits that cannot generate attendance. Drivers like Newgarden who are bullies. Lack of competition among engine suppliers, I can go on but this has been going on for years. Yes there is new ownership, and there are some
    races that do not disappoint but unless the fundamentals change, this series will continue to see diminished interest.

    There are several Indy drivers who, given a chance, would do better than many drivers in
    F1, Latifi Stroll to name the obvious, but if they are driving the same equipment, they will still be back markers.

  8. Then again, someone who settled on staying a big fish in his small pond talking up the qualities of said pond can hardly be a surprise.

    1. He’s happy in that pond, because there’s a real driver’s championship there.

      Switching to F1 is really only worth it for those who can get into one of the 3 top teams quickly.
      And even then, success is more down to the car than the driver. How unsatisfying.

      1. Teams are also very important in Indycar. Since the first post-split 2008 season, the Indycar title has been won by a Ganassi driver nine times, Penske driver four times, and just once with Andretti by Ryan Hunter-Reay in 2012.

        1. Sure – but not nearly in as dominant a fashion as regularly happens in F1.
          There’s still a lot closer competition for that success in Indycar, and the winning margins tend to be substantially smaller.

      2. He is in the equivalent of a top team. Like FI, there are 3 teams that matter today, Penske, Chip Ganassi and Andretti. Like F1 they have the most resources and Penske and the media want him to be king to show that an American can do as good as a Kiwi (Scott) that is the story line they are hoping for.

  9. I watched both SF races & the Saturday race in wet conditions throughout somewhat lacked close racing for a large portion.
    Today’s dry race had better racing quality, especially towards the end with an intra-team battle for the last roughly 3 & half laps.

  10. some racing fan
    22nd August 2022, 4:22

    I agree with Newgarden. The racing in IndyCar is fantastic, however I don’t like that it is a single-chassis formula. I wish one or two other chassis makers would be allowed to enter. It also needs about 3 or 4 more races on the calendar- preferably Watkins Glen, Mexico City, the Homestead-Miami oval and Mont-Tremblant. And maybe a race in Surfer’s Paradise, Motegi and a race in England in August during the F1 break (Donington Park would be good).

Comments are closed.