From the Couch: What kind of fan are you?
May 31st, 2009
Memorial Day weekend always stokes the great racing dispute. With the F1 Monaco Grand Prix starting things off, the fabled Indianapolis 500 shortly thereafter and the Coca-Cola 600, well, a day later, it becomes inevitable. And every year, just like rain on Memorial Day, the which-is-best debate is inevitable, too.
After watching parts of all three races, and poking around the comments posted on these here Internets, I think it’s rather obvious that the "best" form of racing happens to be the one that the opinion holder tends to follow. I appreciate this stance, mostly because I employ it categorically. However, it suggests little about the racing itself and more about the likes of the opinion holder. Here is what I learned, transcribed into my language for the sake of clarity, of course.
If you like Moet, you probably like F1. (But really, if you like Moet, does your opinion count?) Similarly, if you like F1, you probably enjoy ants marching, too. Ants, you see, tend to move about in single file lines, they do not pass, and the first person to reach the destination is preordained. Of course, if you like F1 you like racing fast, because fastest is best, and high tech, so high-tech, in fact, it’s called "formula" racing. This basically amounts to building a land-based, $2 million, rolling supercomputer (and please don’t hit anything with it). And you need high-tech because of the Grands Prix-style racing. This means, well I don’t really know what Grands Prix means, nor am I sure when I’m supposed to use that "s" and when I’m not. I do know what it doesn’t mean, and it doesn’t mean ovals. F1 fans are anti-oval. That’s "American" racing, and that doesn’t go well with the Moet.
Now, if you are an Indy fan, you might be a frat guy, and that is because Indy is on the infield party circuit. (It’s the third stop behind the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness.) Their argument goes like this: "Dude, Indy is killer. I got wicked drunk and hooked up." This is actually a solid argument, particularly if you happen to be 20.
The other major Indy fans appear to be history buffs who prefer a spectacle. The outcome of the race, to this fan, is less important than the historical significance and the hype that surrounds it. This sentiment is certainly shared with some NASCAR fans, but it is somehow always employed as a defamation of the NASCAR series. This is somewhat ironic, given NASCAR’s rich history and the fact that the Indianapolis 500 is a mere shell of its former self. Don’t get me wrong; it’s still "killer" (and still historical). It’s simply not spoken in the hushed and reverent tones it once was. Furthermore, name another event in the league with similar historical relevancy, or another event with even a fraction of the propaganda. As far as most people are aware, and particularly the frat guys, it’s a single-event circuit.
This kind of Indy fan also considers a NASCAR car a blunt instrument and enjoys a quiet night on the couch while viewing Dancing with the Stars. Indy, you see, is elegant, refined, and classy, and nothing, apparently, says elegance like a perfectly performed tango. I believe the point is that NASCAR is more brut than finesse, and therefore a driver could never perform a perfect tango. I doubt this because it’s beyond proof; a NASCAR driver would never try a tango (line dancing, yes, tango never), but also because I’m damn sure that Boris Said has some serious moves. With hair like that, you can get down.
So in the end, Indy and F1 fans are just like NASCAR fans. They are opinionated (just like the Marbles), they will gladly share their opinion (just like the Marbles), and their sport is clearly the best (just like the Marbles). The fact is, all forms are good, because they are all racing. So, it’s a good question, but sadly there is no simple answer. Luckily for us, NASCAR is the best.
Related posts:
Posted in From the Marbles