Whenever talk of track reallocation on the NASCAR schedule comes up, there's one constant refrain: dump California!
With two of the historically most boring races on the circuit, Auto Club Speedway of California takes plenty of heat from the NASCAR faithful. But the NASCAR brass isn't even thinking of dumping a single race from the track in Fontana, for the simple reason that it's located next to the population megalopolis of Los Angeles. Wide, sweeping roads with spread-out traffic may be a dream scenario for California commuters, but it's a nightmare slog for NASCAR fans watching the two Golden State races.
Still, there recently appeared to be good news on the horizon. International Speedway Corp., recognizing that Cali didn't exactly have the liveliest racing on the circuit, had announced multimillion-dollar plans to increase banking and narrow widths in the interest of keeping cars closer together. The changes would cost $23 million to $30 million, and could be completed between the track's two NASCAR dates. Sounds like a plan, right?
Here's the bad news: exactly nothing has happened on the proposal, which Auto Club Speedway's management reportedly pitched to ISC. The LA Times is reporting that ISC has taken zero action on the proposal because of the company's economic conditions.
Fontana has yet to sell out its 92,000-seat grandstands since getting two races a year in 2004. The track runs through the usual litany of excuses -- bad economy, competitive market, bad weather -- but the fall race has been moved into October from Labor Day, and the track is running constant promotions to draw attention. We'll find out in just a couple weeks whether the pre-race work has had any effect. Atlanta had phenomenal success switching up its race date with California; perhaps the other end of that equation will work out just as well.
If not, perhaps it's not any of the ancillary factors. Perhaps it's just that the racing stinks. And that's going to require some serious investment to change.
Retooling of Fontana race track is on idle [Los Angeles Times]
No comments:
Post a Comment